Aimsun Sumo Comp

Linkping University
Department of Science and Technology

Intelligent Transport System
COMPARISON OF THE TWO MICROSIMULATION SOFTWARE

AIMSUN & SUMO
FOR HIGHWAY TRAFFIC MODELLING
AJI RONALDO (aliro229)

TAUFIQ ISMAIL (tauis485)
2012
i
ii
COPYRIGHT
The publishers will keep this document online on the Internet or its possible replacement from
the date of publication barring exceptional circumstances.
The online availability of the document implies permanent permission for anyone to read, to
download, or to print out single copies for his/hers own use and to use it unchanged for noncommercial research and educational purpose. Subsequent transfers of copyright cannot revoke this
permission. All other uses of the document are conditional upon the consent of the copyright owner.
The publisher has taken technical and administrative measures to assure authenticity, security and
accessibility.
According to intellectual property law the author has the right to be mentioned when his/her work is
accessed as described above and to be protected against infringement.
For additional information about the Linkping University Electronic Press and its procedures for
publication and for assurance of document integrity, please refer to its www home page:
http://www.ep.liu.se/.
iii
ABSTRACT
In order to make good decisions in transportation, decision-makers need some references to support
the decision. One source for such reference is to perform a micro-simulation; a model for
representing real-world conditions including the behavior of travelers, vehicles and the
infrastructure. This study will examine and present a comparison between AIMSUN (a commercial
micro-simulation software) and SUMO (a non-commercial micro-simulation software), identifying
advantages and disadvantages of these applications in relation to the study object Sdra lnken, that
is E266 and E75, in south part of Stockholm, Sweden.
A calibration process is conducted in order to find the best value of a set of parameters in each
software. The best set of parameters will be selected based on the lowest value of a Root Mean
Square Error (RMSE) computed based on observed speed data and the model output. The
parameters is then validated using evening peak-hour data.
This research gave result that from the given experiments with the SUMO software, the best set of
parameters was when the value of Driver Imperfection at 0,3 and Drivers Reaction Time at 1,7. For
AIMSUN , the best set of parameters was when the value of Maximum Desired Speed at 100 km/h
and Speed Acceptance at 1,1.
In comparison, AIMSUN has advantages in terms of the simplicity for the user in creating network,
setting the parameters and creating animation over SUMO. The complexity of the SUMO software
stimulate the user to carefully build the model.
Key Word : AIMSUN, micro-simulation, software, traffic, modelling
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Firstly we would like to thank to Allah The Almighty God who gives His grace and mercy so that this
Master Thesis can be completed. For our supervisors Prof. Jan Lundgren and Clas Rydergren, Ph.D,
we also would like to say thank you for their precious supports, guidance and advices all this time.
To our beloved family in Indonesia, who never stops giving their spirits, motivations, love and pray
so that we can finishing our thesis.
Credits also given to our friends from Indonesia Catur Yudo Leksono and Tina Andriyana for their
assistances in the making of our thesis as a teacher and also as a discussion partner. Special thanks
for Amalia Defiani which give us extra power to finish this thesis.
The last but not the least, our gratitude is also given to MSTT UGM and Transportation Ministry of
Indonesia for the support and everything so that the education at Linkping University
accomplished.
Norrkping, June 2012
Aji Ronaldo and Muhammad Taufiq Ismail
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COPYRIGHT.............................................................................................................................................. ii
ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................................... iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................................................................. vii
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................................ x
LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................................... xi
LIST OF ABBREVIATION ........................................................................................................................ xiii
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1
1.1.
BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................... 1
1.2.
AIM AND PURPOSE ................................................................................................................. 1
1.3.
SIGNIFICANCE .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.4.
DELIMINATION ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.5.
AREA OF RESEARCH................................................................................................................. 1
1.6.
STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT ................................................................................................... 3
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................ 5

2.1.
Traffic Simulation .................................................................................................................... 5
2.2.
AIMSUN ................................................................................................................................... 5
2.3.
SUMO (Simulation of Urban MObility) ................................................................................... 6
2.4.
MODEL CALIBRATION.............................................................................................................. 9
2.5.
Previous Research ................................................................................................................. 10
2.2.1.
iTetris ............................................................................................................................ 10
2.2.2.
VABENE ......................................................................................................................... 10
2.2.3.
CityMobil ....................................................................................................................... 11
2.2.4.
VTI Comparison ............................................................................................................. 11
CHAPTER 3 INPUT DATA FOR THE SIMULATION ................................................................................... 13

3.1.
Detector ................................................................................................................................ 13
3.2.
Data ....................................................................................................................................... 15
3.3.
Parameters of the models..................................................................................................... 19
3.3.1.
Parameter in AIMSUN ................................................................................................... 19
3.3.2.
Parameter of the SUMO................................................................................................ 21
CHAPTER 4 MODEL CONSTRUCTION .................................................................................................... 25

4.1.
DEVELOPMENT IN AIMSUN & SUMO.................................................................................... 25

vii
4.1.1.
AIMSUN ......................................................................................................................... 25
4.1.2.
SUMO ............................................................................................................................ 31
4.2.
CALIBRATION AND VALIDATION ........................................................................................... 35
4.2.1.
CALIBRATION IN AIMSUN.............................................................................................. 35
4.2.2.
Calibration of the SUMO ............................................................................................... 36
4.2.3.
VALIDATION IN AIMSUN ............................................................................................... 37
4.2.4.
Validation of the SUMO ................................................................................................ 37
Model Output ....................................................................................................................................... 38

CHAPTER 5 RESULT ............................................................................................................................... 39
5.1.
AIMSUN ................................................................................................................................. 39
5.2.
SUMO .................................................................................................................................... 46
5.3.
COMPARISON AIMSUN AND SUMO...................................................................................... 51
5.3.1.
Result on Speed and Flow ............................................................................................. 51
5.3.2.
Network ........................................................................................................................ 53
5.3.3.
Demand ......................................................................................................................... 53
5.3.4.
Control .......................................................................................................................... 53
5.3.5.
Output ........................................................................................................................... 54
5.3.6.
Guidance ....................................................................................................................... 54
5.3.7.
Technical support .......................................................................................................... 54
CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................... 56

REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 58
APPENDIXES ............................................................................................................................................ a
A.
SUPPLIED DEMAND DATA ........................................................................................................... a

1)
Morning Demand (entrance Detectors) ................................................................................. a
2)
Morning Demand (Exit Detectors) .......................................................................................... b
3)
Matrix of Morning Demand (5 minutes interval).................................................................... c
Matrix of Morning Demand (5 minutes interval)............................................................................ d

4)
Evening Demand (entrance Detectors) ................................................................................... e
5)
Evening Demand (Exit Detectors) ............................................................................................ f
6)
Matrix of Evening Demand (5 minutes interval) ..................................................................... g
Matrix of Evening Demand (5 minutes interval) ............................................................................. h

B.
AIMSUN CALIBRATION ................................................................................................................. i

1)
Calibration Process Entrance Detectors .................................................................................. i

viii
2)
Calibration process in Exit-Detectors ....................................................................................... j
3)
Comparison of Model Output and observation Speed in all detectors .................................. k
4)
Validation AIMSUN Using Evening Flow Data ......................................................................... o
C.
SUMO CALIBRATION ................................................................................................................... s

1)
Detector 1,845 ........................................................................................................................ s
2)
Detector 23,205 .......................................................................................................................t
3)
Detector 3,270 ........................................................................................................................ u
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Detector inventory .................................................................................................................. 14
Table 2. OD-Matrix for morning peak-hour .......................................................................................... 15
Table 3. OD-matrix for evening peak-hour ........................................................................................... 15
Table 4. Flow number and average speed in morning peak-hour ........................................................ 16
Table 5. Flow number and average speed in evening peak-hour ......................................................... 17
Table 6. Flow number and average speed in morning peak-hour ........................................................ 18
Table 7. Flow number and average speed in evening peak-hour ......................................................... 19
Table 8. The Car-following models implemented in SUMO (9) ............................................................ 22
Table 9. Demand matrix for the first 5-minutes demand in morning .................................................. 27
Table 10. Error checking item ............................................................................................................... 31
Table 11. Parameters set in SUMO network......................................................................................... 32
Table 12. Vehicle properties parameter value ..................................................................................... 33
Table 13. The Kraucar-following model parameter value .................................................................. 33
Table 14. The calibration process in Detector 23, 205 ......................................................................... 36
Table 15. t-Test as validation process in detector 23.220 .................................................................... 37
Table 16. Validation process on 1.885 detector ................................................................................... 38
Table 17. RMSE matrix against morning speed data ............................................................................ 39
Table 18. Vehicle parameters ............................................................................................................... 40
Table 19. Behavior Parameter .............................................................................................................. 41
Table 20. t-Test Validation on exit detectors ........................................................................................ 42
Table 21. t-Test validation on entrance detectors................................................................................ 42
Table 22. The Morning Calibration RMSE matrix .................................................................................. 46
Table 23. t-Test Validation against speed data ..................................................................................... 47
Table 24. t-Test Validation against flow data ....................................................................................... 47
Table 25. Comparison of validation on SUMO and AIMSUN by using evening flow data .................... 52
Table 26. Comparison of validation on SUMO and AIMSUN by using evening speed data ................. 53
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Area of research. (2) ................................................................................................................ 2
Figure 2.Detailed picture of research area (2) ........................................................................................ 2
Figure 3. Detailed picture (3) .................................................................................................................. 3
Figure 4. Building a network (11) ............................................................................................................ 7
Figure 5. Building trips from the OD-matrix (11,11) ............................................................................... 8
Figure 6. Detectors location .................................................................................................................. 13
Figure 7. Location of detector ............................................................................................................... 14
Figure 8.Time-series diagram................................................................................................................ 15
Figure 9. Flow diagram (morning peak-hour) ....................................................................................... 17
Figure 10. Flow diagram (evening peak-hour) ...................................................................................... 18
Figure 11. Link-Node Diagram .............................................................................................................. 25
Figure 12. Number of lanes and the detectors ..................................................................................... 26
Figure 13. Lane Width ........................................................................................................................... 26
Figure 14. Flow fluctuation in 5-minutes interval in the morning for detector 23,205........................ 27
Figure 15. Speed fluctuation in 5-minutes interval in the morning for detector 23,205 ..................... 27
Figure 17. 24 morning matrixes and 24 evening matrixes.................................................................... 28
Figure 18. Traffic Demand control for Morning Demand data ............................................................. 29
Figure 19. Steps to create database storage in AIMSUN ...................................................................... 29
Figure 20. example of Replications and Average in each experiment .................................................. 30
Figure 21.Warming-up for flow stream ................................................................................................ 30
Figure 22. Behavior parameter ............................................................................................................. 31
Figure 23. Networks displayed in SUMO-GUI ....................................................................................... 32
Figure 24. Detectors placement in west section .................................................................................. 34
Figure 25. The model run in the SUMO-GUI ......................................................................................... 35
Figure 26. Graphic of RMSE in the AIMSUN.......................................................................................... 40
Figure 27. Morning Speed comparison between observation and the model output data at detector
23,205 in the AIMSUN........................................................................................................................... 41
Figure 28. Morning Speed comparison between observation and the model output data at detector
3.215 in the AIMSUN............................................................................................................................. 42
Figure 29. Evening Flow Comparison between observation and model data at detector 23.220
(South) in the AIMSUN .......................................................................................................................... 43
Figure 30. Evening Flow Comparison between observation and the model output data at detector
1.885 (West) in the AIMSUN ................................................................................................................. 43
3.215 (East) in the AIMSUN .................................................................................................................. 44
Figure 32 Evening Speed Comparison between observation and model output data at detector
23.220 (south) in the AIMSUN .............................................................................................................. 44
Figure 33. Evening Speed Comparison between observation and the model output data at detector
1.885 (West) in the AIMSUN ................................................................................................................. 45
3.215 (East) in the AIMSUN .................................................................................................................. 45
Figure 35. Morning calibration RMSE chart of the SUMO .................................................................... 46
Figure 36. Junction no 1445695315 ...................................................................................................... 48
xi
1.885 (West) in the SUMO .................................................................................................................... 48
23.220 (South) in the SUMO ................................................................................................................. 49
3.215 (South) in the SUMO ................................................................................................................... 49
1.885 (West) in the SUMO .................................................................................................................... 50
23.220 (South) in the SUMO ................................................................................................................. 50
3.215 (East) in the SUMO ...................................................................................................................... 51
Figure 43. Comparison between SUMO and AIMSUN in Evening flow data on exit detectors ............ 51
Figure 44. Comparison between SUMO and AIMSUN in Evening speed data on exit detectors ......... 52
xii
LIST OF ABBREVIATION
AIMSUN
Advanced Interactive Micro-Simulation for Urban and Non-urban network
SUMO
Simulation of Urban Mobility
PC
Personal Computer
MSE
Mean Square Error
RMSE
Root Mean Square Error
xiii
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. BACKGROUND
Transportation decision-making needs references as basis for decision in order to make good
decisions. References which can be used include technical theories, literature studies,
professional judgment or traffic simulation. Simulation is an important tool since simulation can
represent a real condition into a visual model almost perfectly, and also can visually represent
the effect of alternatives.
There are several micro-simulation softwares, both commercial or non-commercial, which can
be used by academics or decision-makers to analyze transportation related problems. Since the
softwares are built based on different theories and assumptions related to the modeling of
traffic, each of these softwares have their own advantages and disadvantages and differences in
outputs and results.
AIMSUN is one popular commercial micro-simulation applications which has been used
frequently in the transportation research field. AIMSUN stands out for the exceptionally high
speed of its simulations and for fusing static and dynamic traffic assignment with mesoscopic,
microscopic and hybrid simulation all within a single software application (1). One noncommercial micro-simulation application is SUMO (Simulation of Urban MObility) which is
developed by the Institute of Transportation Systems at the German Aerospace Center.
1.2. AIM AND PURPOSE

The aim of this thesis is to build, calibrate, validate two simulation models and perform
experiments on a short stretch of motorway, outside of Stockholm. The purpose of the thesis is
to give insights in how traffic simulation models can be used for analyzing real world traffic
problems. The analysis will be based on a comparison of pros and cons of the two traffic
simulation packages SUMO and AIMSUN for motorway traffic simulation. The study object is the
area around E266 and E75 in the south part of Stockholm, Sweden. Input to the simulation study
is data from the motorway control system (MCS) in the area.
1.3. SIGNIFICANCE
This kind of study is needed in order to find out the advantages and disadvantages of two
softwares related to the area of study object. Therefore in the future time, decision makers shall
be able to decide which software, of SUMO and AIMSUN, that would more suitable in a situation
similar to the one studied in this thesis.
1.4. DELIMINATION
The limitations of the study are as follow:
1. The traffic simulation is developed based on provided data from traffic flow and speed
detectors in the study area. The peak-hour data is used for building the traffic simulation
model.
2. The calibration process in each software will only adjust two main parameters in order
to find the best model.
1.5. AREA OF RESEARCH

The area of this research is on Underground Street intersection in Stockholm. The area is the one
of intersection between E266-Street and E75-Street (Sdra lnken). The location is a 3-approach
1
intersection which has 2-3 lane streets, as shown in figure 1. A detailed picture of the research
area can be seen in figure 2 and figure 3.
Figure 1. Area of research. (2)
Figure 2.Detailed picture of research area (2)
Figure 3. Detailed picture (3)
1.6. STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT

This report will be conducted in six chapters that represent the all of its contents. The structure
is the following.
Chapter 2 describes about the description about traffic simulation classification and steps
needed to build a simulation in SUMO and AIMSUN software. This chapter also describes the
calibration process as a adjustment tool to find the best model from the experiments. Previous
research, related to this thesis, is also included in this chapter.
Chapter 3 describes the input data used in each software SUMO and AIMSUN. This chapter
presents speed and flow data on morning and evening peak-hour at the detectors. The model
parameters available in AIMSUN and SUMO are presented in this chapter in order to give better
understanding of the softwares.
Chapter 4 describes the model construction in the two softwares SUMO and AIMSUN. The model
construction is described in terms of network, traffic demand and control in each software. This
chapter also gives more details about how the calibration and validation processes in each
software are conducted.
Chapter 5 describes the finalized models for each software SUMO and AIMSUN. Root Mean
Square Error (RMSE) from the calibration process, and the model output speeds and flows are
also described in this chapter. Further, a general comparison of SUMO and AIMSUN in the term
of Network, Demand, Control, Output, Guidance, Technical Support is presented.
Chapter 6 gives the conclusions of this research including pros and cons of the two softwares
SUMO and AIMSUN.
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

SUMO and AIMSUN are tools that help their user to present simulation of alternatives in traffic
engineering or traffic management. Result of the simulation can be good reference in policy-making
of traffic in object area. This section will give better understanding for the reader about traffic
simulation and the two softwares , of SUMO and AIMSUN.
2.1. Traffic Simulation

In general, simulation is defined as dynamic representation of some part of the real world achieved
by building a computer model and moving it through time (4). The use of computer simulation
started when D.L.Gerlough published his dissertation titled Simulation of freeway traffic on a
general-purpose discrete variable computer at the University of California, Los Angeles, in 1955
(5).
In traffic research, there are four classes of the traffic models, but usually people dividing it into
three, such as:
a. Macroscopic simulation model
The macroscopic simulation model are based on the deterministic relationship of the flow,
speed, and density of the traffic stream. The simulation in a macroscopic model takes place on
a section-by-section basis rather than by tracking individual vehicles (6).
b.
Meso-scopic simulation model

The mesoscopic simulation models combine the properties of both microscopic and
macroscopic simulation models. Traffic flow unit in this type of simulation is individual vehicle
but the movement is using the approach of the macroscopic mode. Mesoscopic simulation
takes place on an aggregate level and does not consider dynamic speed/volume relationship.
(6)
c.
Microscopic simulation model

The microscopic model simulate the movement of individual vehicles based on car-following
and lane-changing theories. Typically, vehicles enter a transportation network using a
statistical distribution of arrivals (6). The microscopic model incorporate sub-models for
acceleration, speed adaptation, lane-changing, gap acceptance etc., to describe how vehicles
move and interact with each other and with the infrastructure (7).
2.2. AIMSUN
AIMSUN is a widely used commercial transport modeling software, developed and marketed by
TSS- Transport Simulation Systems based in Barcelona, Spain. Microscopic simulator and
Mesoscopic simulator are the components of AIMSUN which allow dynamic simulations. They can
deal with different traffic networks: urban networks, freeways, highways, ring roads, arterials and
any combination thereof (8).
The input data required by AIMSUN Dynamic simulators is a simulation scenario, and a set of
simulation parameters that define the experiment. Based on AIMSUN Manual (8), the scenario is
composed of four types of data such as:
a. Network descriptions
The network is a package of links which connected each other by nodes (intersection) and may
have different traffic feature. In order to build the network in AIMSUN, the user needs following
data:
1)
2)
Map of the area (preferably in .DXF format)

Details of the number lanes for each section, reserved and side lanes.
5
3)
4)
5)
Possible turning movement for every junction, including details about the lanes from which
each turning is allowed and solid lines marked on the road surface.
Speed limits for every section and turning speed for allowed turns at every intersection
Detectors
The network consists of main and side lanes; lane identification; geometry specification;
reserved lanes as part of section in the network. Another elements which might be put on the
network are detectors, metering, Variable Message Sign, and pedestrian crossing. The other
part that also important is node or intersection on lanes in the network.
b. Traffic control plans
There are several type of traffic control taken by AIMSUN which are traffic signals, give-way
signs and ramp metering. Traffic signals and give-way signs are used for junction nodes, while
ramp metering is for sections that end at join node. The input data required to define the traffic
control are (1) :
1) Signalized junction: location of signals, the signal groups into which turning movement are
grouped, the sequence of phases and, for each one the signal groups that have right of
way, the offset for the junction and duration of each phase.
2) Un-signalized junctions : definition of priority rules and location of Yield and/or Stop signs
3) Ramp metering: location, type of metering, control parameters (green time, flow or delay
time).
c. Traffic demand data
Traffic demand data in AIMSUN can be defined in two different ways, by the traffic flows at the
sections or by an O/D matrix. Several O/D matrices or Traffic States will be grouped into a traffic
demand. Following data must be provided for those different types of traffic demand data
based on AIMSUN Users Manual:
1) Traffic Flows
a) Vehicle type and the attributes
b) Vehicle classes
c) Flows at the input sections for each vehicle type
d) Turning proportion at all section for each vehicle type
2)
O/D Matrix
a) Centroid definition : traffic source and sinks
b) Vehicle type and attributes
c) Vehicle classes
d) Number of trips going from every origin centroid to any destination one.
d. Public transport plans.

In order to define Public Transport, user is required to input following data:
1) Public Transport lines : a set of consecutive sections composing the route of a particular
bus
2) Reserved lanes
3) Bus stops: location, length and type of bus stops in the network.
4) Allocation of Bus Stops to Public Transport Lines
5) Timetable: departures schedule, type of vehicle and stop times.
2.3. SUMO (Simulation of Urban MObility)

Simulation of Urban MObility is an open source, highly portable, microscopic road traffic
simulation package designed to handle large road networks developed by the Institute of
6
Transportation System at the German Aerospace Center (9). SUMO is not only a traffic simulation,
but rather a suite of applications which help to prepare and perform the simulation of traffic (10).
In order to simulate in a proper format, SUMO requires the representation of road networks and
traffic demand, both have to be imported or generated using different sources. SUMO allows to
generate various outputs for each simulations run. The outputs are ranging from simulated
induction loops to single vehicle positions.
In the SUMO, there are 4 steps needed in order to run the simulation such as:
a. Building the network
Network file of the SUMO describes the traffic related part of a map. It contains the network
of roads/ways, junctions/intersections, and traffic lights in a map. To build the network can be
either done by generating an abstract network using NETGEN, setting up an own description
in XML and importing it using NETCONVERT or by importing an existing road network using
NETCONVERT. The imported existing road network can be found from non-SUMO networks
such as: OpenStreetMap, VISUM, Vissim, openDRIVE, MATsim, ArcView (GIS shape-file),
Elmars GDF and Robocup Simulation League. Although the imported network is representing
the real condition of the network, SUMO users still should make some adjustments in order to
find the exact condition as wanted.
Figure 4. Building a network (11)
b.
Building the demand

Once the network has been built, SUMO users can take a look at it using SUMO-GUI, but will
not see any traffic inside it yet. Using existing OD-Matrix to fill the traffic flow in the network
7
and then convert it into traffic description is one of the ways. In the SUMO there are some
methods to generate routes into the model:
1) Generating explicit routes
To describes own routes there are three possible ways, such as by hand, by using route and
vehicle type distributions, and the last is by using trip definitions. By hand method is the
simplest way to define own routes, but it only be possible if the number routes is not too
high. In the SUMO, a vehicle consists of three parts: the vehicle type which describes the
vehicles physical properties, a route the vehicle shall take, and the vehicle itself.
Some things that should be considered when building on routes, the first thing is all the
routes in the network have to be connected; secondly, the routes have to contain at least
two edges; thirdly, the starting edge has to be at least as long as the car starting on it; and
the last is the route file has to be sorted by starting times.
2) Using flow definitions and turning ratios
This method can be used by dynamic user assignment and alternatives route as an
application for building demand by using flow definitions. This method can also be used to
import demand data given by trips and flows.
3) Importing OD-matrices
To generate routes into the model, the OD-matrices cannot imported independently. So,
the OD-matrix should imported along with the network. The OD-matrix/ matrices can be
converted as amounts of vehicles that drive from one district to another within a certain
time period.
The imported routes only use data saved in VISUM/VISION/VISSIM formats. If the imported
routes are not saved in these formats, there still a way to convert those (ODmatrix/matrices) into one of the supported formats, write our own reader for OD2TRIPS, or
convert them into flow definitions and then give the OD-matrix/matrices DUAROUTER
(dynamic user assignment and alternatives route application). How to importing ODmatrices so that it can be used to generate routes to the model is shown in figure 5.
Figure 5. Building trips from the OD-matrix (11,11)
4) Using random routes

It is said that the random routes are the easiest, but also the most inaccurate way to feed
the network with vehicle movements.
8
c.
d.
Computing the dynamic user assignment (if needed)

In order to know which routes taken by the driver in the simulation, dynamic assignment is
used. There are also some others use of dynamic user assignment, to detect how is the mean
speed of the lane, how much flow over the network, to solve the congestion problem, etc.
Performing the simulation
The network file, the information of routes that will be used in the simulation and the period
of time that will be used in the model are essential to run the model. If one of them is not
applied in the model, the model will not be run properly.
2.4. MODEL CALIBRATION

The calibration is become most important tool in finding the best model from the two softwares.
Result from the calibration will determine the best value of the model parameters. The model
simulation using those value of parameters will generate output which then will be used in
validation process.
Comparison between the model result and the real data which are taken from the field by
comparison test will use 95% probability. Calculated prediction output from both AIMSUN and
SUMO are used to test observed real word data. This thesis is using Excel to conduct all of statistical
calculation in order to find whether the simulation will be considered as good-representing
simulation or not.
CALIBRATION
This research using Mean Square Error (MSE) analysis to calibrate data between the model output
and observation data to find optimal value of parameters in the model development. Based on
Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume III (12)the formula for the calibration is :
(1.1)
Where:
MSE = Mean Square Error
= 5-minutes interval
= Detector
= Model estimate of speed at detector and -th time
= Observation data of speed at detector and -th time
= Number of ime intervals
D = Number of detector
In the AIMSUN and SUMO calibration, speed data is used to find optimal value of parameters. Since
the research decide to develop the model for 2-hours peak period and also use 5 minutes time
interval to measure the average speed, so 24 5-minutes time-interval for 2 hours observation data
is made. The lowest number MSE will take from several experiments on each set of parameters
value. Based on the equation, since the calibration will use speed data then the result from this
equation will have km2/h2 as unit (quadratic function). In order to make it back to the single
function, RMSE (Root Mean Square Error) (13)has been used as shown on equation 2 .
(1.2)
The value of RMSE then will become the main criteria from choose the best set of parameter from
experiments on each set of parameter.
VALIDATION
In order to compare the data of scenario which is defined as (x) with the mean of the existing
validated model data (y), following hypothesis need to be checked
Where:
= average of observed data

= average of model output
will be rejected if
Where :
(1.3)
(1.4)
When
rejected, its mean that the model output cannot representing the observed data.
When
accepted, its mean that the model output can represent the observed data.
2.5.
Previous Research
There are several previous research about the two softwares SUMO and AIMSUN. Those researches
will give the reader better understanding and information about another usefulness of those
software to solve the problems.
2.2.1. iTetris
V2X communication is a technology invented to be applied in cars so that the cars can communicate
with the traffic network. These days, the use of V2X communication is increasing in many countries.
However, the price and the risk is too high to implement such system. Therefore a simulation is
needed in order to measure the benefits of a system before it is deployed into the real world. The
aim of iTETRIS project was to develop such framework and to couple the communication simulator
ns3 and SUMO using an open source system called iCS ITETRIS Control System which was
developed within the project (14). The iCS is responsible for starting the named simulators and
additional programs which simulate the V2X applications. It is also responsible for synchronizing the
participating simulators, and for the message exchange. Using this simulation framework it was
possible to investigate the impacts on V2X communication strategies.
Within the project several traffic management strategies were simulated e.g. prioritization of
emergency vehicles at controlled intersections (15)and rerouting vehicles over bus lanes using V2X
communication (16).
2.2.2. VABENE
For every big city, the need of good traffic condition is essential. When a big event or a disaster
happens, traffic jams will occur and it will have a great impact to the transport systems and may
jeopardize the people who live in the city. The institutions responsible for the traffic should take
proper actions to overcome the worst case. The objective of VABENE is to implement a system
which supports the public authority to decide which action should be taken (14).
10
This project is focusing on simulating the traffic condition of large cities. In order to simulate Munich
city traffic, the mesoscopic traffic model was implemented into SUMO which is available for internal
proposes only. This system was used during popes visit in Germany in 2005 and during the FIFA
World Cup in 2006.
2.2.3. CityMobil
To evaluate the changes in vehicle or driver behavior of large scale effects, microscopic traffic
simulations can be used. In past time, that condition was examined with the help of SUMO in the EU
project CityMobil where different scenarios of (partly) automated cars or personal rapid transit were
set up on different scales, from a parking area up to whole cities (14).
In this study, the evaluation of the benefits of an autonomous bus system was performed.
Furthermore, scenario being applied in this study is the information of passengers waiting and route
adaption to the demand given to the busses. The investigation regarding the influence of platooning
vehicles on a large scale also implemented, where a middle-sized city with 100.000 inhabitants were
used as the model. Those two simulations were showing good result of the transport automation.
2.2.4. VTI Comparison
Swedish National Road Administration perform a research that comparing the Car-following models
from traffic simulation softwares which are AIMSUN, MITSIM, VISSIM, and Fritzsche. The diiferences
between the Car-following model used in these versions and the Fritzsche car-following model is
however unknown (17). The Fritzsche and VISSIM have similar approach, but AIMSUN and MITSIM
have different approaches. Results from those models are show similarities even though have
different car-following approaches.
11
12
CHAPTER 3 INPUT DATA FOR THE SIMULATION

Flow as input data is extracted from detectors on study area. Each detector in this area have its own
flow data in 1-minute interval. These detectors also contain the speed average of vehicles in 1minute intervals. The location of each detector, the speed and flow data from these detectors will be
described in this chapter.
3.1. Detector
There are several detectors placed around the area, figure 6 show the detector spots of the
intersection street E75 and E266. The numbers shown in figure 6 represent the stationary location of
the detector, each stationary location have 1-4 detectors depends on the number of lanes.
E75
E75
Figure 6. Detectors location
Yellow and purple circle in figure 6 represent the detector that be used in this research. Those
detector have different role in the micro-simulation model development depends on the direction of
traffic movement. By considering the detector which been marked by yellow circle as the border, the
total number of detectors is 85. In order to develop the micro-simulation in this research, this
research using data from 29 detectors within this area as input and validation data.
Based on the needs of data input, it was decided to choose several detectors data as input and
validation data for the micro-simulation model that would be created by using AIMSUN and SUMO.
The detector number that will be used in this research are shown in table 1 and to ease for
understanding the situation about research area, a simple picture of detector location/point in
figure 7 is created. The data taken from 00.00 to 18.24 (GMT+1) at 16th of March 2010.
The number inside the box represents stationary point associated with the table 1 below. The yellow
boxes represent the detectors whose data will be used as input for this micro-simulation
development. Figure 7 describe about the position of each detectors according to table 1.
13
Table 1. Detector inventory
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Stationary point
1.845
23.205
3.270
2.300e
23.495
3.015h
23.49
1.885
3.215
23.220
2.170
2.750e
2.370h
23.865r
Quantity
3
2
4
1
1
1
1
3
4
2
4
1
1
1
Detector Numbering
49,50,51
49,50
49,50,51,52
49
49
49
49
49,50,51
49,50,51,52
49,50
49,50,51,52
49
49
49
Role
Main Input
Main Input
Main Input
Proportion Input for 1.845
Validation point
Validation point
Validation point
Proportion input for 1.885
Proportion input for 23.220
Those detectors have different role in data extraction. Table 1 shows the different role of those
detectors. Main input means that the flow extracted from related points will become the basic of
the calculation for determine the O/D matrix. Proportion input means that the flow extracted from
related points became the tool to know the flow proportion in other direction. For example, In order
to get the number of flow for West-to-East direction, the flow is taken from the flow in detector
1.845 minus the flow in detector 2.300e. Similar role as main input is given to the validation point,
the difference is on the purpose of data. The flow extracted from validation point would be used for
validation process while main input will be used for the calibration process.
1.885
3.270
2.170
3.015h
West
East
1.845
3.215
2.300e
23.865
23,490
2.370h
23.495r
2.750e
South
23.205
23.220
Figure 7. Location of detector
14
3.2. Data
Based on the supplied data, the research chooses 2 peak hour in this micro-simulation as morning
and evening peak hour. For the peak hour in the morning 06.30 - 08.30 was chosen and for the
evening peak hour is between 13.30 - 15.30. This duration was chosen based on the flow profile in
this location as shown on figure 8.
Flow Diagram (time series)

7000
Number of vehicles (unit)
6000
5000
4000
3000
Flow
2000
1000
1
9
17
25
33
41
49
57
65
73
81
89
97
105
113
121
129
137
145
153
161
169
177
185
193
0
Set of time series
Figure 8.Time-series diagram
Based on this characteristic, data from all selected detectors during the peak hour (06.30 - 08.30 and
13.30 - 15.30) was taken as main data for this micro-simulation development. Data in detector
number 2.305; 1.845 and 3.270 are used as demand input in micro-simulation program. Detector
number 2.300e; 23.495; 23.490 and 3.015h (in figure 7) is used to determine the proportion of flow
in each direction. As a result from this extraction, the OD-matrix is found for both peak hour
morning and evening for each direction in following table 2 and 3. Table 2 and 3 represent the traffic
flow condition on peak-hour in the area for 2 hours duration.
Table 2. OD-Matrix for morning peak-hour
OD
East
South
West
East
1924
5540
South
1402
275
West
4096
1813
-
Table 3. OD-matrix for evening peak-hour
OD
East
South
West
East
1194
5665
South
1327
545
West
4474
867
15
It should be noted that the data in table 2 and table 3 will not used as input in the two softwares
SUMO and AIMSUN. The data in table 2 and 3 will be divided into 5-minutes interval O/D matrix and
will be used as demand input which represents the traffic movement within the intersection.
Further, based on this number of demand and the parameter, the traffic model will be created to
represent the real condition of traffic.
Table 4. Flow number and average speed in morning peak-hour
Time
6:30:00 - 6:35:00
6:36:00 - 6:40:00
6:41:00 - 6:45:00
6:46:00 - 6:50:00
6:51:00 - 6:55:00
6:56:00 - 7:00:00
7:01:00 - 6:05:00
7:06:00 - 7:10:00
7:11:00 - 7:15:00
7:16:00 - 7:20:00
7:21:00 - 7:25:00
7:26:00 - 7:30:00
7:31:00 - 7:35:00
7:36:00 - 7:40:00
7:41:00 - 7:45:00
7:46:00 - 7:50:00
7:51:00 - 7:55:00
7:56:00 - 8:00:00
8:01:00 - 8:05:00
8:06:00 - 8:10:00
8:11:00 - 8:15:00
8:16:00 - 8:20:00
8:21:00 - 8:25:00
8:26:00 - 8:30:00
Total
23.205
Flow
Speed
130
67.36
153
64.4
156
64.1
172
61
162
64.3
170
63.3
175
62.4
152
60.4
139
61.7
174
60.7
166
59.6
143
60.4
139
64.3
170
61
138
62.9
152
61.3
142
61.9
160
60.6
152
60.3
152
61.7
149
61.5
137
63.5
141
62.9
119
63.4
3643
Detector
1.845
Flow
Speed
320
72.94
255
73.53
291
71.93
300
73.60
262
73.53
261
72.33
267
70.33
239
72.13
240
71.47
254
70.67
257
70.40
269
67.80
272
69.47
262
71.13
275
70.67
287
67.73
242
71.67
247
70.13
243
71.93
222
50.40
147
20.60
144
20.40
135
18.33
124
18.80
5815
3.270
Flow
Speed
314
65.25
296
67.5
293
56.65
292
37.3
291
36
292
36.9
309
37.7
252
33.05
212
27.55
198
29.1
199
29.65
249
28.7
212
28.65
213
30.9
175
25.35
167
28.1
261
28.15
180
25.65
168
29.45
165
37.2
240
30.7
133
23.15
214
31.25
173
29.9
5498
The OD-matrix in table 2 is created based on the total number of flow in table 4 and table 6. It is
implied from table 2 that 25.5% flow from East-section go to the south-section and rest of them go
to the west. It also can be implied that 95.3% traffic flow from the west go to the east and 51.5%
traffic flow from the south-section go to the East-section. Similar with the table 2, table 3 is created
based on the flow number in table 5 and table 7. In the evening peak-hour there are no significant
different. Flow percentage of traffic flow from East-to-West section and South-to-East section are
bigger that morning peak-hour, but for the West-to-East section traffic flow is smaller that morning
(91.2%).
16
Flow (unit)
flow diagram (morning peak-hour)

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Detector 2,305 Flow

Detector 1,845 Flow
Detector 3,270 Flow
Figure 9. Flow diagram (morning peak-hour)

Table 5. Flow number and average speed in evening peak-hour
Time
13:30:00 - 13:35:00
13:36:00 - 13:40:00
13:41:00 - 13:45:00
13:46:00 - 13:50:00
13:51:00 - 13:55:00
13:56:00 - 14:00:00
14:01:00 - 14:05:00
14:06:00 - 14:10:00
14:11:00 - 14:15:00
14:16:00 - 14:20:00
14:21:00 - 14:25:00
14:26:00 - 14:30:00
14:31:00 - 14:35:00
14:36:00 - 14:40:00
14:41:00 - 14:45:00
14:46:00 - 14:50:00
14:51:00 - 14:55:00
14:56:00 - 15:00:00
15:01:00 - 15:05:00
15:06:00 - 15:10:00
15:11:00 - 15:15:00
15:16:00 - 15:20:00
15:21:00 - 15:25:00
15:26:00 - 15:30:00
23.205
Flow
Speed
74
64.5
69
64
71
63.1
75
66.2
98
64.3
84
65.6
78
65.1
71
65.7
85
65
99
64
87
65.1
85
65.3
74
65.3
105
64.3
88
62.5
110
62
88
66
63
84.6
96
66.9
119
65.2
100
62.7
90
63.8
109
65
2018
Detector
1.845
Flow
Speed
311
68.22
235
70.53
259
67.53
245
69.40
243
68.47
250
69.07
228
70.93
247
68.07
268
68.80
249
71.60
243
70.40
258
69.13
260
68.53
254
69.20
260
67.67
248
68.73
297
66.27
279
62.67
313
64.27
304
57.87
311
42.53
292
34.13
291
36.60
65
43.33
6210
3.27
Flow
Speed
260
67.5
230
69.65
243
67.8
236
68
228
76.7
235
76.45
229
68.05
231
67.6
257
76
253
77.15
237
67.55
248
68.45
241
67.4
240
65.95
277
67.45
224
77.65
231
69.5
254
67.7
306
64.5
285
65.8
264
67.4
286
65.2
306
65.05
5801
17
Flow (unit)
Flow diagram (evening peak-hour)

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Detector 2,305 Flow

Detector 1,845 Flow
Detector 3,27 Flow
Figure 10. Flow diagram (evening peak-hour)

Table 6. Flow number and average speed in morning peak-hour
Detector
Time
6:30:00 - 6:35:00
6:36:00 - 6:40:00
6:41:00 - 6:45:00
6:46:00 - 6:50:00
6:51:00 - 6:55:00
6:56:00 - 7:00:00
7:01:00 - 6:05:00
7:06:00 - 7:10:00
7:11:00 - 7:15:00
7:16:00 - 7:20:00
7:21:00 - 7:25:00
7:26:00 - 7:30:00
7:31:00 - 7:35:00
7:36:00 - 7:40:00
7:41:00 - 7:45:00
7:46:00 - 7:50:00
7:51:00 - 7:55:00
7:56:00 - 8:00:00
8:01:00 - 8:05:00
8:06:00 - 8:10:00
8:11:00 - 8:15:00
8:16:00 - 8:20:00
8:21:00 - 8:25:00
8:26:00 - 8:30:00
Total
Flow
11
9
11
4
14
25
23
11
11
8
0
0
22
11
14
5
4
15
7
12
10
23
17
8
275
2300e
Speed
72.00
66.00
70.00
73.00
74.00
71.00
68.50
74.00
70.00
73.00
0.00
0.00
67.33
75.00
69.50
68.00
74.00
69.00
74.50
62.00
59.50
58.25
63.50
62.50
23.495
Flow
Speed
76
67.5
72
67.8
71
66.2
98
63.6
93
64
98
63.2
93
65.2
83
65.4
74
62.2
88
63
73
64.6
91
62.6
71
68.4
88
60.2
75
65.4
90
63
69
64.6
64
64.2
95
60
81
63
81
62.4
65
63.4
71
63.4
64
64.2
1924
3.015h
Flow
Speed
51
76.33
40
76.6
48
73.4
63
73.2
52
71.2
57
72.6
56
73.4
66
69.2
65
63.4
62
68.8
67
67.6
67
65.4
63
62.2
65
66.2
66
62.2
69
63.8
63
64.2
60
63
54
66.2
59
61.8
58
65.8
55
63.4
52
67
44
66
1402
23.49
Flow
Speed
65
68.2
90
65.8
77
66
76
66.2
84
64.4
68
67.2
81
64.4
75
64.2
70
61.6
81
63
91
60.4
75
62.2
70
66
78
63.8
73
63.8
67
64.2
77
63
92
61.8
71
62.2
72
63.8
66
62.8
81
62.4
74
60.2
59
63.4
1813
18
Table 7. Flow number and average speed in evening peak-hour
Detector
Time
13:30:00 - 13:35:00
13:36:00 - 13:40:00
13:41:00 - 13:45:00
13:46:00 - 13:50:00
13:51:00 - 13:55:00
13:56:00 - 14:00:00
14:01:00 - 14:05:00
14:06:00 - 14:10:00
14:11:00 - 14:15:00
14:16:00 - 14:20:00
14:21:00 - 14:25:00
14:26:00 - 14:30:00
14:31:00 - 14:35:00
14:36:00 - 14:40:00
14:41:00 - 14:45:00
14:46:00 - 14:50:00
14:51:00 - 14:55:00
14:56:00 - 15:00:00
15:01:00 - 15:05:00
15:06:00 - 15:10:00
15:11:00 - 15:15:00
15:16:00 - 15:20:00
15:21:00 - 15:25:00
Total
Flow
25
25
28
10
13
7
12
11
23
18
28
30
12
20
23
19
35
29
18
31
59
23
46
545
2300e
Speed
66.20
69.25
66.50
68.50
70.50
66.00
66.00
68.00
72.33
70.33
70.25
68.00
66.50
71.25
68.00
69.67
69.25
70.00
69.50
68.25
63.50
69.00
63.25
23.495
Flow
Speed
47
66
45
65.6
44
65.4
45
67.8
53
65
50
66.8
53
66
40
65.2
61
64.4
51
65
53
66
61
64.6
36
67
56
64.2
54
64.2
60
63
36
69.8
49
64.6
48
67
63
63.6
69
63.8
49
66.6
71
63.2
1194
Flow
49
44
66
53
60
53
44
42
63
63
57
65
50
62
66
54
60
62
63
67
61
57
66
1327
3.015
Speed
71.2
72.4
71.4
71.8
71.4
73.4
75.8
76.2
72
74.2
72.8
75
73.4
69.6
73.6
72
71.8
70.8
71.4
74
75.6
71.2
72.2
Flow
38
30
39
31
44
33
25
36
23
48
36
28
44
46
39
47
38
26
44
61
36
41
34
867
23.49
Speed
71.1
67.6
69.8
69.6
67.4
70
68.2
68.2
67.8
65.8
69.4
68.6
69.2
67.4
66.6
66,4
66.8
69
71.2
67.6
69
68.6
67.4
3.3. Parameters of the models

The model contains several parameters that will influence the output of the model. This section will
describe about what kind of parameters that will be used in the two softwares SUMO and AIMSUN.
3.3.1. Parameter in AIMSUN
Vehicle Parameters
Vehicle characteristic of vehicle are include length, power ratio and it width. Higher power ratio on a
car can be used in the special condition such as overtaking condition, in which car driver tend to give
bigger power ration or acceleration. Based on AIMSUN Manual (1) Vehicle parameters are included:
a) Width (meters)
This parameter is only for graphical purpose and does not have a direct influence on the modeling of
traffic.
19
b) Maximum desired speed (km/h)

Maximum speed of the type of vehicle can travel at any point in the network.
c) Maximum acceleration (m/s2)
Maximum acceleration that can achieved by vehicle at any circumstance
d) Normal deceleration (m/s2)
Maximum deceleration of vehicle under normal circumstances (as used in the Gipps car-following
model).
e) Maximum deceleration (m/s2)
It can be considered as most severe breaking that can apply under special circumstances.
f) Speed acceptance
This parameter (>0) can be interpreted as the level of goodness of the drivers or the degree of
acceptance of speed limits. > 1 means that the vehicle will take as maximum speed for a section a
value greater than the speed limit, while < 1 means that the vehicle will use a lower speed limit.
See the next section for details on how maximum desired speed for a vehicle is calculated for
different parts of the network (1).
g) Minimum distance between vehicles (meters)
A vehicle will keep this distance between itself and preceding vehicle when stopped.
h) Maximum give-way time
This parameter applies either the normal gap-acceptance model or the lane-changing model in order
to cross or merges with traffic.
i) Guidance acceptance,
This parameter (0 1) gives the level of compliance of related vehicle type with the guidance
indication.
Driver Parameter
The model also will use driver behavior to determine which the model is fit to the real condition.
Parameters applied for driver parameter are:
a) Driver's reaction time
Driver's reaction time is the time that used by the driver to react to speed change in the preceding
vehicle. Reaction time can be either Fixed (equal to Simulation Step) or Variable (multiple of
Simulation Step). In Fixed type, the values are same for all vehicles. In Variable type, the user can
define a discrete probability function for each vehicle type (18).
b) Reaction time at stop
Reaction time at stop is the time taken for a stopped vehicle to react to the vehicle acceleration in
front or to the light traffic changing to green. This parameter has a strong influence in the queue
discharge behavior.
c) Queuing Up Speed
This is the threshold of vehicles speed value (m/s). If any vehicles speed decrease below this
threshold, then it will be considered stopped and join the queue.
20
d) Queuing Leaving Speed

This is the threshold value of vehicles speed (m/s). If any stopped-vehicle speed in a queue
increases above this threshold value, then it will be considered left the queue and no longer to be at
a standstill.
e) Car-Following model,
The car-following model used in AIMSUN is based on the Gipps model which basically consists of two
components, which are acceleration and deceleration. Acceleration represent the vehicle intention
to reach a certain point of speed (desired speed), and Deceleration represent the limitation imposed
by the preceding vehicle when trying to drive on the desired speed (1).
2-lanes Car-Following parameters used in this model are:
a) Number of vehicles
Maximum number of vehicles in the 2-lane variation of the Car-Following Model, which is used for
modeling the influence of adjacent lanes in the Car-Following Model.
b) Maximum Distance,
Maximum distance ahead to be considered in the 2-lane Car Following Model.
c) Maximum Speed difference,
Maximum speed difference between one lane and the adjacent lane in the 2-lane Car Following
Model.
d) Maximum Speed difference On-Ramp
Maximum speed difference between the main lane and an on-ramp lane in the 2-lane Car following
Model.
Lane Changing Parameters
Percent overtake
This parameter represents the percentage of the speed from which a vehicle decides to overtake.
The value has to be greater than zero and less than or equal to one
Other global parameters
Road side of vehicle movement
The effect of this parameter on simulation result varies, depending on the geometry and type of the
network, but it always affects the behavior of the vehicles.
3.3.2. Parameter of the SUMO
Vehicle Parameters
a) Vehicle Properties
Vehicles used in the model should be defined whether is it a passenger car, truck, or bus. To define
what kind of vehicle used in the SUMO, some vehicle properties have to be set first. The vehicle
properties were set in the flow file and the parameters to be set on that property are:
a. id the name of the vehicle type;
b. length the vehicles netto-length (m);
c. miniGap empty space after leader (m);
d. maxSpeed - the vehicles maximum velocity (m/s);
e. guiShape how this vehicle is rendered;
f. guiWidth the vehicles width (m).
21
b) Routes
The parameters used in route path and flow proportion are:
a. id the name of route in certain interval;
b. from the name of the edge which is route started;
c. to the name of the edge which is route ended;
d. Number - the number of vehicles generated in the model;
e. type the name of vehicle types;
c) Car-Following model
The car-following model describes that the speed of following car
is influenced by the
acceleration of the preceding car
, which can be described best by the following equation:
:
:
:
speed of vehicle n
speed of succeeding vehicle n
drivers reaction time (s)
The equation above was first proposed by Pipes as cited in Krauss, 1998 (19).
In the SUMO, the car-following models implemented:
Table 8. The Car-following models implemented in SUMO (9)
Element
1. carFollowing-Krauss
Short Name
SUMOKrau
Description
The Krau-model with some modifications
which is the default model used in SUMO
2. carFollowing-KraussOrig1
SKOrig
The original Krau-model
3. carFollowingPWagner2009
PW2009
A model by Peter Wagner, using Todosievs

action points.
4. carFollowing-BKerner
Kerner
A model by Boris Kerner

Note: currently under work
5. carFollowing-IDM
IDM
The Intelligent Driver Model by Martin Treiber

Note: Problems with lane changing occur
In SUMO, the SUMOKrau model is used. This model is a modification of the original Krau model.
Basically, the Krau model can be formulate as follow (19):
Where,
22
The index vn is the notation of vehicles position where the leading vehicle always has bigger value
than the following. The gap or distance between two vehicles denoted as
, desired gap or
expresses how long the gap between vehicles can be achieved, vehicle desired
speed or
shows how large the driver can run the vehicle with maximum speed, time step or
is assumed has the same value or equal to the drivers reaction time, time scale is defined as
where it has the same value with . Here the random perturbation
has been introduced to
allow for deviations from optimal driving. has the same value with a, where is having value
between 0 and 1. The maximum acceleration (a), deceleration (b), and jammed spacing (l) are
assumed constant.
The parameters used in the SUMO Krau model are:
a. accel acceleration ability [m/s2],
b. decal deceleration ability [m/s2],
c. sigma driver imperfection (real value between 0 and 1 inclusive),
d. tau drivers reaction time *s+,
e. minGap gap between preceding and following cars [m].
Vehicles and Routes
a) Repeated vehicles
It is possible to define repeated vehicle flows, which have the same parameters as the vehicle except
for the departure time. The id of the created vehicles is "flowId.runningNumber" and they are
distributed equally in the given interval. The following additional parameters are known:
a. begin first vehicle departure time [s],
b. end end of departure interval [s],
c. vehsPerHour number of vehicles per hour (not together with period) [h],
d. period repetition period (not together with vehsPerHour) [s],
e. number total number of vehicles [#].
b) Routes
Each route has its own class and to differentiate one to others, it colored with different color in the
map. As well as in the SUMO, to distinguish one route to another, it gives attributes to the route
such as id (the name of the route), color (the routes color) and edges.
A vehicles depart and arrival parameter
To control how a vehicle is inserted into the network and how it leaves it, SUMO needs to add some
parameters such as:
a. departLane the lane on which the vehicle shall be inserted.
b. departPos the position at which the vehicle shall enter the network [m],
c. departSpeed the speed with which the vehicle shall enter the network [m/s]
d. arrivalLane the lane at which the vehicle shall leave the network,
e. arrivalPos the position at which the vehicle shall leave the network [m],
f. arrivalSpeed the speed with which the vehicle shall leave the network [m/s].
Stops
In some case e.g. at signalized intersections, roundabout, etc. drivers have to stop their car in order
to give way to other drivers for a couple of seconds or minutes. As if in the modeling like SUMO,
vehicles may be stop for a defined time span or wait for persons by using the stop element either as
part of a route or a vehicle.
Lane Changing Parameters
In the SUMO version 0.15.1, parameters such as the lane change model, and others, are not directly
accessible to a user in configuration files. Therefore, the parameters mentioned before were not
23
considered during the calibration process. For vehicle and driver parameters of the car following
model, special attentions is given to:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
accel acceleration ability [m/s2]

decal deceleration ability [m/s2]
sigma driver imperfection (real value between 0 and 1 inclusive),
length vehicle length (increased by a typical gap distance between stopped vehicles) [m],
maxspeed vehicle maximum velocity [m/s],
24
CHAPTER 4 MODEL CONSTRUCTION

4.1.
DEVELOPMENT IN AIMSUN & SUMO
There are several elements that needed to construct a model in both software SUMO and AIMSUN.
This section will explain about each element included in each software in order to make the model.
4.1.1.
AIMSUN
LINK-NODE DIAGRAM
Network development can be done by using GUI (Graphical User Interface) which facilitated by
AIMSUN itself. Generally, there are 6 links, 4 nodes and 3 centroids in this network as shown in
figure 10 below.
Centroid
345
Centroid
346
Centroid
347
Figure 11. Link-Node Diagram
GUI in AIMSUN made user can directly build and modified the network as closely as possible to the
real traffic condition. Actually, the network can be considered as 3-approachment intersection but
with different stage of lane. The directions are coming from south, east, and west.
LINK GEOMETRY DATA
a) Number of Lane
There are different numbers of lane within links in this network. For link from west to east (E75), the
number of lane change 3 times. At the beginning (from west) the road has 3 lanes, but since there is
diverging link the number of lane reduced into 2 lanes. About hundred meters before merging lane,
the number of lane of this link increased into 3 lanes and then increased again into 4 lanes after
there is merging lane from south direction. All links which directly connected to East-centroid have 4
lanes road. All links which directly connected to the west-centroid are 3-lanes-roads for and 2-lanesroad for all links which directly connected to south-centroid. Figure 11 shows about the number of
lane in study area.
25
= Main detectors
Figure 12. Number of lanes and the detectors
b) Lane width
Most part of the network is in the tunnel. In main tunnel, lane width is 3.75 m and at the ramps 4.5
m. Specific dimension for the road in the main tunnel is 0.75 m for left shoulder; 3.75 m for main
lane and 1.75 m for the right shoulder. For the ramp part, the specific dimension is 2.5 m for left
shoulder; 4.5 m for main lane and 1 m for right shoulder. The dimension can be seen at figure 12 .
Along the network there are no pedestrian crossing facilities, bus stop, or reserved lane for public
transport. Detail picture of lane width in on ramp and main tunnel can be seen in figure 12
below.
ON RAMP LANE
LEFT SHOULDER
RIGHT
SHOULDER
LANE
1m
2,5 m
4m
MAIN TUNNEL LANE
LEFT SHOULDER
LANE
LANE
RIGHT SHOULDER
1,75 m
0,75 m
3,75 m
3,75 m
Figure 13. Lane Width
26
TRAFFIC DEMAND DATA

Since the supplied data do not mention about the type of the car, every vehicle counted on related
detector are considered as private car. 24 demand matrix was used on the morning as traffic
demand input in order to get the real fluctuation as the real condition. Each matrix is a 5-minutes
flow aggregation for all direction. Table 8 shows about demand matrix for the first 5-minutes from 2
hours demand which become input for the model. Graphic in figure 11 shows about the fluctuation
of demand in 5-minutes interval which covered by detector 23,205. It can be implied that O/Dmatrix in table 8 give a contribution on the first point in figure 13.
Table 9. Demand matrix for the first 5-minutes demand in morning
O/D
West
East
South
West
East
South
0
263
54
309
0
76
11
51
0
Flow (veh)
detector 23.205 (enterance)

140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
10
15
20
25
Time series (5 minutes)
Observation
Figure 14. Flow fluctuation in 5-minutes interval in the morning for detector 23.205
The flow data are subtracted from the counting of 14 different detectors. Each detector also count
the average spot speed in 1 minute interval. For analysis purpose, those speeds were broke down
into 5-minutes average speed. Figure 14 shows speed average in 5-minutes interval on detector
23.205.
detector 23,205
Speed (km/h)
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
10
15
20
25
Observation
Figure 15. Speed fluctuation in 5-minutes interval in the morning for detector 23.205
27
SIMULATION CONTROL DATA

a) Scenario
In order to run the simulation, Dynamic Scenario has to be created. Each Dynamic Scenario contains
traffic demand that will be used in every experiment on the same scenario. The user has to
determine what kind of traffic demand will be used. In each Dynamic Scenario also determine where
the result will be saved as database, and how long the interval of the result will be generated. A
Dynamic Scenario can hold 15-19 experiments. Figure 15 shows the user interface in AIMSUN where
the user shall select the traffic demand.
Figure 16. Scenario control interface in AIMSUM
b) Traffic Demand Control Data

Traffic demand as mentioned in previous part has important part in the modeling process. The
demand will determine the result of the model in the end. This analysis covered 2 hours demand
with 5-minutes interval of flow, which means 24 matrixes of 5-minutes interval flow as seen in table
8 for morning demand control and the other 24 for evening demand control (figure 16).
Figure 17. 24 morning matrixes and 24 evening matrixes
In AIMSUN, all 24 matrixes of morning demand will combine each other in Traffic Demands control
as seen in figure 17.
28
Figure 18. Traffic Demand control for Morning Demand data
c) Database
Each scenario has to be connected to one database file as data storage. Scenario and database are
connected by QODBC driver. Every QODBC driver has several connections and each connection have
its own database. In every scenario, the user has to determine the QODBC connection to keep the
result of each replication in each experiment. Figure 18 shows steps to create database storage
connection in AIMSUN.
Figure 19. Steps to create database storage in AIMSUN
29
d) Experiment
Each experiment has different set of parameter value. 10 replications were created on each
experiments and 1 average that will be calculates the average of those 10 replications. In order to
make it easier to find the data and to remind experiment that have been done, each experiment was
renamed based on the number or value of parameters that changed in each experiment. Right part
of figure 19 shows an example about experiment in AIMSUN.
Figure 20. example of Replications and Average in each experiment
The number of average replication has to recorded for each experiment to ease for finding the
data in database. In each experiment, value of behavior parameters were set as default (figure 21)
and put 15 minutes as warming-up of flow stream (figure 20).
Figure 21.Warming-up for flow stream
30
Figure 22. Behavior parameter
Options such as applying the 2-lane car following model, warm-up time, and reaction time, lanechanging (figure 21) have to be performed in each experiment .
Table 10. Error checking item
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
Item
Network
Demand Data
Vehicle Parameter
Behavior parameter
Database Connesction
Number of Replication
Access
GUI
Demand option
Vehicle option
Experiment option
Scenario option
Experiment Option
When the entire item above checked by user, a proper simulation or experiment can be performed
using parameters which decided to be taken at the beginning of each simulation.
4.1.2.
SUMO
Network
A network is very essential in building a traffic simulation, because it is the core or the foundation of
the model itself. Without the existence of a network, the traffic simulation model cannot be run. In
the SUMO, there are two ways to build a network such as:
a) Writing our own network on XML-descriptions; and
b) Importing from non-SUMO networks.
In this thesis, non-SUMO networks was used to create the networks. The non-SUMO networks being
used as the base of the networks is coming from OpenStreetMap file. Due to the true nature of the
studied location are arterial roads, set some parameters were applied when editing the network in
Java OpenStreetMap editor, such as:
31
Table 11. Parameters set in SUMO network
Parameter
1. Maximum Speed
2. Lane width (Sdra lnken Tunnel)
3. Lane width (on ramp & off ramp)
Value
70 km/h
3.75 m
4.5 m
After the networks editing is completed, then it saved in .osm file format. The output from in Java
OpenStreetMap editor cannot be directly used in the SUMO, because SUMO cannot read any .osm
files. SUMO can only identify networks in .xml format files, therefore the .osm file should be
converted into .xml format files by using an application called NETCONVERT run in windows
command prompt. Now the networks can be seen in the SUMO-GUI as seen in figure 22.
Figure 23. Networks displayed in SUMO-GUI
Demand Modeling
The demand modeling is classified into three section, they are vehicle properties, the Krau carfollowing model and flow. All parameters of vehicle properties, the Krau car-following model and
flow are set altogether in one file called flow file.
a) Vehicle properties
Parameters measured as vehicle parameters of the SUMO are including dimension, classes,
visualization, speeds, gap, and vehicle emission classes. However, in this thesis, there are some
parameters that not included or consider as one type such as vehicle emission classes, vehicle
classes, and visualization. For vehicle classes and visualization, due to the existence of the data
regarding those parameters are not available, those parameters are considered as one type such
as sedan with yellow color.
32
Parameters to be set in vehicle properties:

Table 12. Vehicle properties parameter value
Parameter
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
id
length
miniGap
maxSpeed
guiShape
guiWidth
Value
Car
4.5 m
1m
100 km/h (27.78 m/s)
Passenger/sedan
2m
b) Krau car-following model

As mentioned in chapter 3 above, the Kraumodel is used as the car-following model. This model
which has some modifications is the default model used in the SUMO. The parameters to be set
in the SUMO Krau car-following model can be seen in the following table.
Table 13. The Kraucar-following model parameter value
Parameter
1.
2.
3.
4.
accel
decel
sigma
tau
Value
2
5.5 m/s
5 m/s2
0-1
From 1 - seconds
c) flow
After vehicles properties and the car-following model have been set, route path and flow
proportion of the vehicles should be made to be inserted to the model. The route built should
ensure the vehicles travelled from the right origin nodes to the destination nodes as well. In this
model, the 5 minutes period aggregated vehicle flow is made for two hours duration.
Those three inputs are written in the format of .xml. After those inputs are saved, the next step is
combining the network with the demand modeling by using a SUMO application called
duarouter.exe via command prompt windows. The extensions of the combined file should be
.rou.xml.
Output
To generate an output to analyze, an additional file should be made first. This additional file is saved
in .xml format and it contains two sections. The first section is containing detectors data to give
mean speed output to validate. In the second section, an edge dump was set in order to have the
wanted output. The outputs will be kept in .xml format as well. The parameters being used in
additional file are:
Detector
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
id the name of the detectors;

type the type of the detectors (e1, e2 or e3);
lane the id of the lane where the detectors shall be laid on;
pos - the position of the detector in the lane being used (m);
length the length of the detectors (m);
freq the aggregation of time period (second);
33
g. file the output file name (.xml format);

h. measures contain the list of measures that will be computed (all to compute all measures;
i. timeThreshold time that describe how much time that assumed as vehicle has stopped
(second);
j. speedThreshold speed that describe how speed that assumed this vehicle count as suffered to
the jump (m);
k. jamThreshold minimum distance to the next vehicle that assumed this vehicle count as
suffered to the jump (m);
l. keep_for information how long the memory of the detector has to be (second);
Edge dump
a. id the name of output in certain aggregated time
b. freq aggregated time (second);
c. file the output file name (.xml format)
The detectors are placed in various places as well as the original detectors in real world. 16 detectors
were applied on the network to measure the speed and the flow. They are spread on the entry and
exit edges of the networks. The placement of detectors on the network can be seen in the figure 24.
Figure 24. Detectors placement in west section
However, the results from the model cannot be use directly for the calibration and validation while
still in .xml format. SUMO-users should extract it from .xml format file into excel file first, afterwards
output data can be analyzed.
Generating the model
After those three files above have been made, it does not mean that the model can be generated. It
is because to run a model of the SUMO we still need another file which can call the network file,
route file, and additional file altogether or so called the generator file. The file extension should be in
.sumo.cfg. In the generator file, time definition should be mention. The time definition shall include
the beginning and the end time of the model in seconds. When the generator file has been made,
now the model can be run. Next figure is showing the model run in SUMO-GUI.
34
Figure 25. The model run in the SUMO-GUI
4.2.
CALIBRATION AND VALIDATION
The calibration of the SUMO and AIMSUN in this research used morning-speed data to find optimal
value for the set of parameters which used in this model. The model output of morning-speed data
will be calibrated against observation morning-speed data. In validation process, AIMSUN and SUMO
used evening-flow data to validate the model. The model output of evening-speed data will be
validated against observation evening-flow data.
4.2.1. CALIBRATION IN AIMSUN
The calibration is an important part in modeling since there are no model that can exactly accurate
to the real traffic condition. The calibration is kind of adaptation process for the model to represent
the real traffic condition.
Morning speed data is calibrated to get optimal value of the model parameters by changing two
parameters which predicted will directly influence to the speed on the network. Those two
parameters are speed acceptance and maximum desired speed. Other parameters considered as not
significantly influence the speed on the network. 150 experiments has been done for 150
combination set of those two parameters. For Maximum Desired Speed parameter, it has range from
55 km/h to 115 Km/h as shown in table 14. For Speed Acceptance, this research has range from 1 to
1.9 with 0.1 interval. Table 9 contains the calibration process for detector 23,205 (d=1) using formula
(2). Same process occurred on the rest of detectors and leads to gain the RMSE total for all
detectors. These steps were repeated for each experiment result for each combination set of
parameters. The model output speed in table 9 came from set of parameters maximum desired
speed = 100 km/h and speed acceptance = 1.1. In the end of this process, this set of parameters
resulted RMSE = 113.808. From those 150 experiments resulted 150 value of RMSE (Root Mean
Square Error) for each set of parameter value as shown at the next chapter.
35
Table 14. The calibration process in Detector 23, 205
Time
6:30:00 - 6:35:00
6:36:00 - 6:40:00
6:41:00 - 6:45:00
6:46:00 - 6:50:00
6:51:00 - 6:55:00
6:56:00 - 7:00:00
7:01:00 - 6:05:00
7:06:00 - 7:10:00
7:11:00 - 7:15:00
7:16:00 - 7:20:00
7:21:00 - 7:25:00
7:26:00 - 7:30:00
7:31:00 - 7:35:00
7:36:00 - 7:40:00
7:41:00 - 7:45:00
7:46:00 - 7:50:00
7:51:00 - 7:55:00
7:56:00 - 8:00:00
8:01:00 - 8:05:00
8:06:00 - 8:10:00
8:11:00 - 8:15:00
8:16:00 - 8:20:00
8:21:00 - 8:25:00
8:26:00 - 8:30:00
23,205
Speed
Observation
Speed
Model Output
67.36
64.4
64.1
61
64.3
63.3
62.4
60.4
61.7
60.7
59.6
60.4
64.3
61
62.9
61.3
61.9
60.6
60.3
61.7
61.5
63.5
62.9
63.4
70.91
67.90
64.05
66.79
61.92
63.59
63.66
65.91
65.21
63.36
63.34
68.13
67.66
64.37
63.99
66.43
66.81
65.85
63.78
65.90
64.52
67.76
67.69
69.00
12.56
12.26
0.002
33.52
5.67
0.09
1.59
30.34
12.35
7.07
13.99
59.74
11.31
11.37
1.18
26.36
24.11
27.53
12.14
17.66
9.15
18.18
22.96
31.40
16.77
4.2.2. Calibration of the SUMO

In the SUMO, speed parameter is used in the calibration process. The reason was because the
observation data only provide speed and flow. The flow data was not being used in the calibration
process because the output will be the same flow input as the data given.
As mentioned in chapter 2 section 2.1.4, Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) minimizing analysis were
used to calibrate data between the model output and observed data to find the optimal value of
parameters in the model development. In order to find the optimal value of parameters in the
model, some parameters were changed or modified. The changed parameters in the calibration
process are those in Krau car-following parameters.
After having several trial and error experiments, there are only two parameters occurred which can
make significant changes in the network. Those parameters are sigma (driver imperfection) and tau
(drivers reaction time). Other parameters value is kept the same as shown in the table 11.
The sigma parameter value is experiencing 9 times modification, because its value is ranging from 0
to 1. Sigma value of 1 was not inserted in modification, because it would be have a great deviation of
36
all value. Furthermore the tau parameter value also experiencing some modifications, total 10
modifications has been set in tau value.
So, from the calculation we can get the RMSE value of detector 3.270-49 by dividing it with time
aggregation. After the RMSE value on that detector has been found, the next step is to sum it with
other detectors RMSE value so that the networks RMSE value can be found. Furthermore, the
networks RMSE values, from all 90 experiments, were put in a matrix. From that matrix we can
analyze which parameter settings can produce the best networks RMSE value.
4.2.3. VALIDATION IN AIMSUN

Validation process has been done against evening-peak-hour flow data. Re-running the experiment
using evening-peak-hour demand data as input is used in the validation process of this research. The
set of parameters that will be used in this re-run experiment is taken from the one which have
lowest RMSE in the calibration process. From this experiment, the model output flow in each
detector is resulted and then will be validated against observation evening-flow-data in related
detector using formula (2). Example of result in detector 23.220 for this validation can be seen in
table 15. Section 2.4 explained the hypothesis used in validation process.
Table 15. t-Test as validation process in detector 23.220
Mean
Variance
Observations
t Stat ( )
P(T<=t) one-tail
t Critical one-tail
P(T<=t) two-tail
t Critical two-tail (
Observation
Model
86.45
231.78
22
1.59
0.06
1.68
0.12
2.02
79.63
171.89
22
accept
Based on the hypothesis, it can be implied that the model output speed in detector 23.220 not
significantly different with observation speed data. Similar process was applied to the other
detectors. Since the purpose of this research is to compare the softwares, the importance of
is
only for knowing about the capability of the model to the real condition of traffic.
4.2.4. Validation of the SUMO
As well as in the AIMSUN validation process, evening peak-hour demand data also used as input. To
run the evening peak-hour demand data, the parameters where the best morning networks RMSE
value is found were used. The output generated from the models detectors then validated with the
observation detectors data. The formula being used in this validation process is t-test formula as
shown in chapter 2 section 2.1.4 above. Following calculation is a sample calculation of detector
1.885.
37
Table 16. Validation process on 1.885 detector
NO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Observation
19.55
19.48
19.65
19.48
19.74
19.52
19.19
19.50
19.48
18.61
18.85
18.98
19.46
19.33
18.70
19.04
18.24
19.57
19.63
18.33
17.13
18.52
17.37
15.83
453.20
0.67
0.60
0.76
0.60
0.86
0.64
0.30
0.62
0.60
-0.27
-0.03
0.10
0.58
0.45
-0.18
0.15
-0.64
0.69
0.75
-0.55
-1.75
-0.36
-1.51
-3.05
0.00
Model Output
0.45
0.36
0.58
0.36
0.74
0.40
0.09
0.38
0.36
0.07
0.00
0.01
0.34
0.20
0.03
0.02
0.41
0.48
0.56
0.30
3.08
0.13
2.29
9.30
20.94
12.42
18.58
18.93
18.69
18.71
18.50
18.62
18.51
18.56
18.56
18.43
18.59
18.57
18.60
18.54
18.69
18.49
18.65
18.52
18.43
18.69
18.55
12.48
18.57
433.93
-5.66
0.50
0.85
0.62
0.63
0.42
0.54
0.43
0.48
0.48
0.36
0.52
0.49
0.52
0.46
0.62
0.42
0.57
0.44
0.35
0.61
0.47
-5.60
0.49
0.00
32.04
0.25
0.72
0.38
0.40
0.18
0.29
0.18
0.23
0.23
0.13
0.27
0.24
0.27
0.21
0.38
0.17
0.32
0.19
0.12
0.38
0.22
31.36
0.24
69.41
38
CHAPTER 5 RESULT
5.1. AIMSUN
In the calibration process, this research adjusted to parameters (Speed Acceptance and Max Desired
Speed). An experiment for each set of those parameters is performed in this process in order to get
its RMSE value. Overall, there are 150 sets of parameters were experimented. RMSE value from
those experiments is served in a matrix format as shown on table 17 below.
Table 17. RMSE matrix against morning speed data
SPEED MSE
Speed Acceptance
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
55 km/h
32.870
32.142
31.694
31.069
30.871
30.830
30.950
30.520
30.940
31.024
60 km/h
31.829
30.541
29.735
29.165
29.331
28.700
27.810
28.200
28.054
28.174
65 km/h
30.627
28.540
27.036
26.519
26.237
25.240
25.131
26.084
25.531
25.418
70 km/h
28.915
25.607
24.604
23.904
22.935
22.902
22.965
22.738
23.391
22.319
75 km/h
26.517
23.192
22.217
21.579
20.911
20.958
20.874
21.108
22.436
20.800
80 km/h
24.125
21.483
20.468
20.464
20.161
20.091
20.398
20.281
20.159
20.488
85 km/h
22.665
20.698
19.847
19.881
19.966
20.101
20.142
20.241
20.360
20.393
90 km/h
21.843
20.105
19.608
19.754
20.104
20.598
20.861
21.156
21.045
21.057
95 km/h
21.247
19.627
19.694
20.192
20.851
21.661
21.992
22.190
22.223
22.511
100
20.345
km/h
105
20.614
km/h
107
20.138
km/h
109
20.437
km/h
111
19.893
km/h
113
20.348
km/h
Source: experiments
19.394
19.979
21.134
22.011
22.799
23.323
23.625
23.753
23.924
19.550
20.543
21.870
23.172
24.197
24.897
25.101
25.363
25.689
19.671
20.555
22.225
23.460
24.635
25.439
25.642
26.109
26.393
19.572
20.869
22.630
24.103
25.208
25.850
26.435
26.774
26.880
19.681
21.224
23.123
24.625
26.044
26.869
27.603
27.874
28.032
19.858
21.612
23.602
25.591
27.140
28.253
28.816
29.112
29.195
Max Desired Speed
From table 17 above it can be implied that the lowest RMSE in those experiments is when Maximum
Desired Speed on 100 km/h and Speed Acceptance on 1.1. This set of parameters considered as
optimal value of parameter in this model. Figure 25 shows graphical version of table 17 which
implied that MSE value will get bigger when Speed Acceptance have a value bigger than 1.1 for
Maximum Desired Speed equal to 100 km/h. With the same Speed Acceptance value, RMSE value
will go bigger when Maximum Desired Speed greater than 100 km/h.
39
RMSE In Morning Model Calibration
RMSE
35
55 km/h
33
60 km/h
31
65 km/h
29
70 km/h
75 km/h
27
80 km/h
25
85 km/h
23
90 km/h
95 km/h
21
100 km/h
19
0,9
1,1
1,2
1,3
1,4
1,5
1,6
1,7
1,8
1,9
105 km/h
107 km/h
Speed Acceptance
Figure 26. Graphic of RMSE in the AIMSUN
In the calibration process, two parameters were adjusted to find minimum RMSE but for another
parameter it has been set to the default value by AIMSUN as mentioned in table below. Table 13
shows the value of vehicle parameters which have minimum RMSE in the calibration process.
Table 18. Vehicle parameters
Vehicle parameter
unit
Mean
Range
Min
Max
length
Width
Max Desired Speed
Max Acceleration
Normal Deceleration
Max Deceleration
Speed Acceptance
Minimum Distance
Vehicle
Give Away Time
Guidance Acceptance
Sensitivity Factor
Minimum Headway
Meter
Meter
Km/h
m/s2
m/s2
m/s2
4
2
100
3
4
6
1.1
1
0.5
0
30
0.2
0.25
0.5
0.3
0.3
3.4
2
10
2.6
3.5
5
0.1
0.5
4.6
2
115
3.4
4.5
7
2
1.5
10
75
1
0
2.5
10
0
0
5
65
1
0
15
90
1
0
meter
sec
%
Sec
For behavioral parameter such as the car-following model, Lane-changing, and reaction time, the
default value also being set as shown in table 19.
40
Table 19. Behavior Parameter
Parameter
Unit
Value
2-lanes car following model

Number of vehicles
Max Distance
Max Speed Difference
MaxSpeed Difference on Ramp
veh
Meter
Km/h
Km/h
4
100
50
70
Lane Changing
Percent overtake
Percent Recover
On Ramp Model
Queuing Up Speed
Queuing Leaving Speed
%
%
90
95
m/s2
m/s2
1
4
Warm-up
Reaction Time at stop
Reaction Time at Traffic Light
minutes
sec
sec
15
1.35
1.35
When the simulation for the calibration against morning-speed-data by using those parameters as
appeared in table 18 and 19 was run, result of this simulation shown as figure 27 below. From figure
27 and 28 it can be implied that model output speed for detector 23,205 and detector 3.215 are
slightly different from observation speed data in the same detector for morning peak-hours.
detector 23,205 (entrance)

70
68
Speed (km/h)
66
64
62
60
58
56
54
52
50
0
10
15
20
25

Observation
Model
Figure 27. Morning Speed comparison between observation and the model output data at detector 23.205 in the
AIMSUN
41
Speed (km/h)
detector 3,215 (exit)

70
68
66
64
62
60
58
56
54
52
50
0
10
15
20
25
Observation
Model
Figure 28. Morning Speed comparison between observation and the model output data at detector 3.215 in the AIMSUN
By using the best set of parameters in the calibration process, the experiment was re-run using this
set of parameters with different traffic demand (evening traffic demand). Result of this experiment
then will be validated against evening flow observation data. For the following table 20 and 21, the
hypothesis were used. The hypothesis was
it means that there is no significant
difference between observed data (
and model output (
If
will be
rejected, otherwise
will be accepted.
Table 20. t-Test Validation on exit detectors
Detector
t Stat
( )
t Critical two-tail
(
Classification
23.220 (South)
1.329
2.018
Accept Ho
1.885 (West)
5.523
2.018
Reject Ho
3.215 (East)
-0.713
2.018
Accept Ho
Table 21. t-Test validation on entrance detectors
Detector
t Stat
( )
t Critical two-tail
(
Classification
23,205 (South)
0.037
2.018
Accept Ho
1,845 (West)
0.293
2.018
Accept Ho
3,270 (East)
0.079
2.018
Accept Ho
Figure 29, 30 and 31 respectively show about the model output and observation flow data for
detector 23.220, 1.885 and 3.215 on the evening peak-hour. Accept Ho Classification means that
model output data no significantly different compare to the observation data. In the other side,
42
reject Ho means that model output data has significantly different compare to the observation data.
For detector 1.885 (west), there are significant difference between the model output and
observation data in this detector. This condition may occurred since there weaving section that
influenced by diverging lane outside study area. This condition also may explain about what happen
with the result shown in figure 32.

120
110
Flow (Veh)
100
90
80
70
60
50
0
10
15
20
25
Observation
Model
Figure 29. Evening Flow Comparison between observation and model data at detector 23.220 (South) in the AIMSUN
Flow (veh)
detector 1,885 (Exit)

350
330
310
290
270
250
230
210
190
170
150
0
10
15
20
25
Observation
Model
Figure 30. Evening Flow Comparison between observation and the model output data at detector 1.885 (West) in the
AIMSUN
43

340
Flow (km/h)
320
300
280
260
240
220
200
0
10
15
20
25

Observation
Model
Figure 31. Evening Flow Comparison between observation and the model output data at detector 3.215 (East) in the
AIMSUN
Validation result on all exit points in the network shows that the model is valid for all exit detectors
except detector 1.885 (West). For all entrance detectors, the model results are valid to observation
data using same formula (2).
On entrance detectors, the model output can be validated against observation data as shown on
table 21. The model output flow data for all of those detectors is not significantly different with the
observation flow data at similar point. Figure 31, 32, and 33 shows about comparison of the model
output and evening observation speed data in detector 23.220 , 1.885 and 3.215 respectively.

75
Speed (Km/h)
70
65
60
55
50
0
10
15
20
25

Observation
Model
Figure 32 Evening Speed Comparison between observation and model output data at detector 23.220 (south) in the
AIMSUN
44
detector 1,885 (Exit)

75
73
Speed (km/h)
71
69
67
65
63
61
59
57
55
0
10
15
20
25
Observation
Model
Figure 33. Evening Speed Comparison between observation and the model output data at detector 1.885 (West) in the
AIMSUN

70
Speed (km/h)
68
66
64
62
60
58
0
10
15
20
25
Observation
Model
Figure 34. Evening Speed Comparison between observation and the model output data at detector 3.215 (East) in the
AIMSUN
45
5.2.
SUMO
Total 90 experiments were performed in the calibration process. Those experiments were aimed to
find the best networks RMSE value. Each of them was put on a matrix in Microsoft Excel in order to
make a proper chart of RMSE in morning calibration.
Table 22. The Morning Calibration RMSE matrix
Sigma 0.1
Sigma 0.2
Sigma 0.3
Sigma 0.4
Sigma 0.5
Sigma 0.6
Sigma 0.7
Sigma 0.8
Sigma 0.9
tau 1
tau 1.1
tau 1.2
tau 1.3
tau 1.4
tau 1.5
tau 1.6
tau 1.7
tau 1.8
tau 1.9
14.83
14.74
14.66
14.62
14.57
14.59
14.64
14.78
14.98
14.83
14.74
14.66
14.61
14.59
14.61
14.68
14.82
15.09
14.83
14.74
14.67
14.61
14.60
14.64
14.77
14.89
15.05
14.82
14.73
14.67
14.62
14.62
14.71
14.80
15.01
15.67
14.83
14.73
14.68
14.63
14.70
14.73
14.96
15.11
16.56
14.82
14.73
14.68
14.54
14.70
14.87
15.02
15.49
16.94
14.82
14.74
14.58
14.67
14.82
14.87
15.04
16.07
17.24
14.18
13.93
13.90
14.10
14.14
14.33
14.70
19.54
20.14
13.94
14.03
13.96
14.34
14.53
14.99
16.23
18.67
19.58
13.94
14.03
13.96
14.34
14.53
14.99
16.23
18.67
19.58
From the calibration process, it was found that the best network RMSE value is 13.90 km/h. That
RMSE value is found when the value of tau is 1.7 and sigma is 0.3. Following figure is the morning
calibration RMSE chart.
Morning Calibration
21,00
tau 1
20,00
tau 1,1
RM S E
19,00
tau 1,2
18,00
tau 1,3
17,00
tau 1,4
16,00
tau 1,5
15,00
tau 1,6
14,00
tau 1,7
13,00
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
Driver imperfection
tau 1,8
tau 1,9
Figure 35. Morning calibration RMSE chart of the SUMO
The set of parameters of the best networks RMSE in the morning calibration then used to run the
evening model output in order to validate the model. To check whether the output of the model is
valid or not, validation process was applied to the exit detectors. The detectors being applied are
detector number 1.885; 3.215; and 23.220. The output of those exit detectors is described in the
following table. The hypothesis was
it means that there is no significant
difference between existing model data (
and model output (
If
will
be rejected, otherwise
will be accepted.
46
Table 23. t-Test Validation against speed data
1.885
23.220
3.215
Sp2
1.96
0.11
0.67
(1.98)
(3.06)
(16.15)
2.01
2.01
2.01
Accept Ho
Reject Ho
Reject Ho
Table 24. t-Test Validation against flow data
1.885
23.220
3.215
Sp2
420.604
228.343
458.55
-24.555
10.65
-11.674
2.013
2.013
2.013
Reject Ho
Reject Ho
Reject Ho
As seen in table 23 above, two of three detectors are resulting rejected values. On the contrary,
table 24 shows us that the flow validation is resulting none of them has accepted values. Rejected
value means that |T| or T-count < T-table or t. Based on validation of flow data of the SUMO, the
model cannot be used for those three detectors. The chart of validation result can be seen in the
following figures.
In figure 37 below, we can see that there is a big gap between observation and the model output
chart. The gap exists due to there were several collisions occurred in one of junctions on the
northern side of Sdra lnken Tunnel. The collisions not only made the traffics speed around that
road decreasing but also affecting the amount of flow passing through it.
Though SUMO is a micro-simulation software using the collision free model, collisions are still
occurred. For this simulation, the collisions occurred in junction no 1445695315(figure 36) where it is
a narrowed junction from three lanes to two lanes on the northern side of Sdra Lnken Tunnel. The
collisions were happen when cars from the 2nd and the 1st lane are joining to the first lane on the
next edge while cars from the 3rd lane are continuing their travel to the second lane on the next
edge. This problem cannot be solved by only shifting the traffic from 2nd lane to join with the 3rd lane
to second lane on the next edge, because it just shifting the collisions from the 1st lane to the 2nd
lane of the next edge.
47
Figure 36. Junction no 1445695315
Flow (Veh)
Flow validation 1,885 (exit)

330
310
290
270
250
230
210
190
170
150
130
110
90
0
10
15
Time Series (5 minutes)
20
25
observation
model
Figure 37. Evening Flow Comparison between observation and the model output data at detector 1.885 (West) in the
SUMO
48
Flow

160
150
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
0
10
15
20
25
observation
model
Figure 38. Evening Flow Comparison between observation and the model output data at detector 23.220 (South) in the
SUMO

330
310
Flow
290
270
250
230
210
190
170
0
10
15
20
25
observation
model
Figure 39. Evening Flow Comparison between observation and the model output data at detector 3.215 (South) in the
SUMO
Instead of continuing the validation process until all the detectors resulting significant or accepted
result, this research was ending up the validation. The reason of why it was stopping the validation
process is because the purpose of this thesis is to compare micro-simulation software used in this
thesis.
Detector 1.885 has three series of detector in it such as detector no 49, 50 and 51. Detector no 49 is
the slowest lane or the most right lane and so on. In figure 40 below, the speed is started at low
mean speed value for the first 5 minutes. Afterwards it happens again in the 23th set of 5 minute.
Those conditions happened because of there was no vehicles passing through detector 51 of
detector number 1.885 on those intervals. The absences of vehicles passing through one of the
detector on those intervals made the mean speed chart above shows drastic changes.
49
Speed validation 1,885 (exit)

75
Mean speed (km/h)
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
1
11
16
21
observation
model
Figure 40. Evening Speed Comparison between observation and the model output data at detector 1.885 (West) in the
SUMO
Mean speed (km/h)
72
70
68
66
64
1
13
17
21
observation
model
Figure 41. Evening Speed Comparison between observation and the model output data at detector 23.220 (South) in the
SUMO
For the speed validation result, peculiarity occurred. In figure 42, we can see that in the detector
number 3.215 at the model chart speed is increasing in last interval. Beforehand, detector 3.215 has
4 set of detectors and the line expressed on the chart is derived from the average speed of those
detectors. From the 1st interval to 23rd, only 3 detectors were passed by the vehicles. However, when
it came to the 24th interval, all detectors were passed by vehicles. This is the reason why in the last
interval of detector 3.215 the model speed suddenly increase.
50
Mean speed (km/h)
70
65
60
55
50
45
1
11
16
21
observation
model
Figure 42. Evening Speed Comparison between observation and the model output data at detector 3.215 (East) in the
SUMO
5.3.
COMPARISON AIMSUN AND SUMO
5.3.1. Result on Speed and Flow

According to the result from both software, it can be seen that for speed and flow AIMSUN gave
closer result to the observation data than SUMO did. Figure 43 shows comparison graphic of flow on
three exit points/detectors. This comparison used evening observation flow data compare to the
flow resulted from the two softwares SUMO and AIMSUN using evening traffic demand.
1,885 (exit) West
3,215 (exit) East
350
Flow (veh)
250
200
150
100
50
0
10
15
20
25
observation
SUMO
AIMSUN
10
15
20
25
observation
SUMO
AIMSUN
23,220 (exit) South

160
140
Flow (Veh)
Flow (Veh)
300
350
330
310
290
270
250
230
210
190
170
150
120
100
80
60
40
0
10
15
20
25
observation
SUMO
AIMSUN
Figure 43. Comparison between SUMO and AIMSUN in Evening flow data on exit detectors
51
When comparison is made using evening speed data from the two softwares SUMO and AIMSUN,
there are differences in the result. On detector 23.220 and 1.885 SUMO give better result than
AIMSUN. In figure 44 it can be seen that in both detectors the result form SUMO are closer than
AIMSUN to the observation data.
Even though in comparison using speed data SUMO give better result in two exit detectors, AIMSUN
still better software since in comparison using flow data AIMSUN give better result in all exit
detectors. For flow data, AIMSUN still gives the better result than SUMO. At least there are three
reasons causing this fact. The first reason is due to the infrastructure accuracy level of AIMSUN is
better than SUMO. For example, AIMSUN can build kerb on it while in the SUMO cant. The second
reason is because of the fact that in the SUMO model occurred several collisions which made the
flow became small. The last reason is due to not all vehicles in the model were passing through each
detectors set in every time intervals.
1,885 (exit) West
3,215 (exit) East
75
75
70
65
Speed (km/h)
Speed (km/h)
70
60
55
50
65
60
55
45
40
50
0
10
15
20
25
observation
SUMO
AIMSUN
10
15
20
25
observation
SUMO
AIMSUN
Speed (km/h)
23,220 (exit) South

75
73
71
69
67
65
63
61
59
57
55
0
10
15
20
25
observation
SUMO
AIMSUN
Figure 44. Comparison between SUMO and AIMSUN in Evening speed data on exit detectors
Table 25. Comparison of validation on SUMO and AIMSUN by using evening flow data
Detector
23.220 (South)
1.885 (West)
3.215 (East)
t Stat
AIMSUN
t Stat
SUMO
t Critical
two-tail
Classification
AIMSUN
SUMO
1.323
5.523
-0.713
10.65
-24.55
-11.67
2.018
2.018
2.018
Accept Ho
Reject Ho
Accept Ho
Reject Ho
Reject Ho
Reject Ho
52
On table 25 shows that by using evening flow data for validation the model from both software
AIMSUN and SUMO, AIMSUN give better result. Even though figure 42 shows that SUMO give closer
speed to the observation speed data, but in table 26 it can be seen that statistically SUMO did not
give better result than AIMSUN.
Table 26. Comparison of validation on SUMO and AIMSUN by using evening speed data
Detector
23.220 (South)
1.885 (West)
3.215 (East)
t Stat
AIMSUN
15.33
4.37
-0.69
t Stat
SUMO
t Critical
two-tail
Classification
AIMSUN
SUMO
-3.06
-1.98
-16.15
2.018
2.018
2.018
Reject Ho
Reject Ho
Accept Ho
Reject Ho
Accept Ho
Reject Ho
5.3.2. Network
AIMSUN gives much saving time for user to develop the network rather than SUMO. User interface
in AIMSUN make user possible to directly draw the network when operating the software, in the
other side SUMO has complicated system for network building. In the SUMO user have to declare
the network attributes for all infrastructure. SUMOs user has to create kind of coding system in XML
files to make it sure that the network connected, while AIMSUN facilitate user the option for
creating, editing, adding the network.
AIMSUN and SUMO have similarities in order to make their user less difficult in network building.
Both of them have option that can make their user importing network file from other software. For
SUMO, the network can be imported from OpenStreetMap; VISUM; Vissim; openDRIVE, MATsim;
ArcView; Elmars; Robocup; Simulation League (20). There should be some adjustments before it can
be use or displayed in the SUMO-GUI. However, the imported network should also compared to the
network map owned by the authorities i.e. FHWA, Trafikverket, etc. in order to have a good and
exact picture of the network. AIMSUN network can be imported from Getram; GIS(Shapefiles);
Image File; 3D Studio; Wavefront; DWG/DXF; AutoCAD Drawing File; EMME/2; CONTRAM Network;
SATURN Network; Paramics Network; Synchro Control Plan (21).
5.3.3. Demand
AIMSUN and SUMO have similarity in demand modification for the model input. Both of this
software using O/D matrix as demand input data for develop their model. The different is on the
easiness to access the option to O/D Matrix modification. AIMSUN gives access for user to directly
modify the O/D Matrix. The modified O/D Matrix then will automatically compile in traffic demand
file as mentioned in previous part. On SUMO, user has to modify XML file to modify the demand
(flow) for each lane or direction. The modification has to be performed in each lane for each time
interval.
Demand modification of the SUMO is very vulnerable for error or mistaken because demand data
should be modified on its XML file. When the user wants to change the number of demand, they
have to change it lane by lane for each direction and for each time interval. For this kind of problem,
AIMSUN make it easier by giving the user chance to decrease or increase the demand just by put
percentage in each O/D matrix.
5.3.4. Control
SUMO has three different files to perform a simulation, one of those file is configuration file that
control about network and demand file that will be run on each simulation. In GUI of SUMO, user
has to determine or call the configuration file and network before perform the simulation. Every
53
time a modification occurred, SUMO users should make an adjustment. The adjustment can be
saved the file, using duarouter application to combine the network, car following and flow data so
that the configuration file can recognize the new modification. This step will consume more memory
in PC, but this problem can be measured by transfer the output file in XLM format into excel file
after each experiment. SUMO processing an experiment within less time since this software does
not need high specification of a PC.
AIMSUN have more simple steps for control each experiment. User just needs to determine about
behavioral parameter in each experiment. There is no configuration file in AIMSUN for each
experiment. User just needs to make sure that value of parameter in each experiment is on the right
value. AIMSUN simulation processing consume more time for each experiment, greater the number
of replication in each experiment the longer time needed for AIMSUN to process an experiment.
5.3.5. Output
AIMSUN and SUMO have different system for output storage. SUMO software generate output file
in XML extension which have size 150-200 kB for each experiment output file. The size of files will be
larger depends on the network size. XML file from SUMO can be opened on Excel to ease the
calculation. In the other side, AIMSUN generates more file size as output file for each experiment
performed. Each replication in each experiment has unique number which will be recognized when
the user want to find exact data. The output file can be opened using Microsoft Access Database and
based on experience in this research the output file size can be up to 500 MB for 15 experiments
with 10 replications in each experiment. Output in AIMSUN contains information about performance
of the network. Time interval produced in output file is determined by the user when define the
scenario.
5.3.6. Guidance
AIMSUN provide guidance for their user by Users Manual on its software. As open source software,
SUMO is also providing the guidance for all its users. The user manual can be downloaded from
SUMOs website. The website also contains the guidance about how to build the network and all
things needed in the SUMO, including short tutorial. This tutorial was really helpful for user to
understanding SUMO. Although do not give any tutorial in the guidance, AIMSUN provide detailed
information about software on AIMSUN User Manual which can directly accessed while working on
the software. AIMSUN user does not need to open internet browser to find guidance related to the
software.
5.3.7. Technical support
In the term of graphical interface, AIMSUN provide more advantages to the user by giving option for
2D or 3D display with higher detail of animation than SUMO which just can perform 2D animation
display. High detail of animation in AIMSUN needs high-end specification of PC as consequences
such as 2GB RAM or 200 MB hard-disk capacity should be provided in PC. SUMO software is really
easy to be installed since it comes with small size of software. SUMO platform is compliable using
most platforms (22)
54
Table 27. Comparison AIMSUN and SUMO
NO
1
AIMSUN
Model Development
Network
Traffic Demand
Run Control
Output
SUMO
Directly created in the

Created in XML file by
software operation through
defining each link and
GUI
each
Have option to import the
connection/intersection
network from other software Have option to import the
network from other
software but still have to
be converted
O/D matrix for each time
Manually defined in XML
interval
file along with link coding
Turning proportion
for each time interval
Need to check the value of
Checking XML file of
parameter for each
Network, Demand and
experiment.
configuration in each
An experiment can contains
experiment.
several replication
.dbf file which can be opened .XML file which can be
by using Microsoft Access
opened by Microsoft Office
Database
Excel
Technical Aspect
Computer Specification Middle to high end
specification
Compatible for windows, Mac
OS X and Linux
Animation Display
2D
3D
Smooth animation
User Skill
User friendly for nonprogramming user
License
Limited
Improvement
Guidance
Low to middle end

specification
Compatible in almost all
platform
2D
Low detail animation
Programming skill is
recommended
Free (Open-Source)
Rare
Relatively often
User can fully involved in
improvement
Directly accessed from Help Internet browser needed
option in the software
55
CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the comparison of the results of the two softwares for the studied area, it can be
concluded that AIMSUN model performes better than the SUMO model. Regarding the complexity
aspect of using the softwares, SUMO is more complex system to get used to than AIMSUN. For the
user, AIMSUN provide easiness by its GUI (Graphical User Interface) for building network, demand
and control for each experiment.
The SUMO software outputs speed data in the unit of m/s and AIMSUN outputs speed data in km/h
unit. This condition affected the value of RMSE. In order to compare the software, the speed from
SUMO is converted into km/h. After converting the speed, SUMO resulted in a RMSE value which is
13.90 lower than the value for AIMSUN. Based on the value of RMSE, SUMO gave better results. But
it should be noted that AIMSUN calculate the average of its 10-replications while SUMO only
calculate one replication. Each replication in AIMSUN gives different model output, several
replications give higher model output than observed data and other replications give lower model
output than observed data. When the calibrated-model from the two softwares was applied to the
evening demand, AIMSUN result in a better validation than SUMO. The calibrated Sumo model gave
result that significantly different from the observed data at all detectors while the calibrated
AIMSUN model gave result not significantly different from the observation data on most detectors.
In this thesis, two simulation models have been constructed, one for AIMSUN and one for SUMO.
The AIMSUN model is calibrated using theparameters Speed Acceptance and Maximum Desired
Speed. The best set of parameters based on RMSE value is on 1.1 for Speed Acceptance and 100
km/h for Maximum Desired Speed with RMSE value at this level is 19.394. However, when this set of
parameter was validated against evening-flow data it turns out that the model is not statistically
valid for all detectors. The detector 1.885, in the west section, is the detector that is not valid against
evening-flow data. The SUMO model was calibrated using the parameters Driver
ImperfectionDrivers Reaction Time. It was found that the best set of parameters based on its RMSE
value is when 0.3 and 1.7, respectively, with a RMSE value of 13.90. When the validation process of
the SUMO was performed against evening-speed data, similar conclusions as for the AIMSUN model
can be drawn. The result of validation shows that the model is not valid for all detectors. Validation
result shows that the model output data on detector 1.885 is significantly different with observation
data.
The calibration process in this thesis was limited to adjusts two parameters. More parameters can
be adjusted in the calibration process in order to get better results.
In a feature comparison, the AIMSUN and SUMO softwares are relatively similar. AIMSUN, as a
commercial micro-simulation software, has more options when building the network. Whereas in
SUMO user has to write an XML file to create detectors. This step is very vulnerable for user
mistakes. These features of SUMO make it more suitable for academic purposes and the software
requires a more deep understanding about the software and micro-simulation in general. The
AIMSUN 6.1 version in this research has many advantages. A user can relatively easily build, draw or
import the network, setting the parameters, and run the model. A users manual is available. The
software reuqires a license The software also require a relatively high specification of the PC to
handle the simulation and animations. There is no option for user to apply different behavior
parameter like lane-changing or the car-following model in different areas within a network.
SUMO 0.14.0 which was used for this thesis is accessible for everyone through the website. The
complexity of the software can stimulate the user to more carefully build the model. The
56
complexities also give good basic experience for user in micro-simulation model building. The Free
license of this software makes it easy for everyone to use it or maybe give contribution in its
improvement. The complexities of SUMO software obviously give several drawbacks. It will be
vulnerable for user to make mistakes in network or demand coding in the XML files. A user also will
have have to spend significant time for creating infrastructure feature such as detectors, pedestrian
crossings, and other infrastructure features.
57
REFERENCES
1. Transport Simulation System. AIMSUN. [Online].; 2010 [cited 2012 February. Available from:
http://www.aimsun.com/wp/?page_id=21.
2. google. maps.google.com. [Online]. [cited 2012 04 15. Available from: http://maps.google.com/.
3. OpenStreetMap. OpenStreetMap. [Online].; 2012 [cited 2012 04. Available from:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/.
4. Drew DR. Traffic Flow Theory and Control New York: McGraw-Hill; 1968.
5. Kallberg H. Traffic Simulation (in Finnish): Helsinki University of Technology, Transportation
Engineering. Espoo; 1971.
6. Alexiadis V, Jeannotte K, Chandra A. Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume I: Traffic Analysis Tools
Primer Oackland, CA: US. Department of Transportation; 2004.
7. Olstam JJ. A Model for Simulation and Generation of Surrounding Vehicles in Driving Simulators
Norrkoping: UniTryck; 2005.
8. TSS-Transport Simulation Systems. Microsimulator and Mesosimulator Aimsun 6.1 User's
Manual: TSS-Transport Simulation Systems. S.L.; 2010.
9. German Aerospace Center, Instute of Transportation Systems. sourceforge.net. [Online].; 2011
[cited 2012 February 16. Available from:
http://sumo.sourceforge.net/doc/current/docs/userdoc/SUMO_User_Documentation.html.
10. Behrisch M, Bieker L, Erdmann J, Krajzewicz D. SUMO - Simulation of Urban Mobility, An
Overview. In The Third International Conference on Advances in System Simulation; 2011; Berlin:
Institute of Transportation Systems, German Aerospace Center. p. 1.
11. Krajzewicz D, Behrisch M. SUMO - Simulation of Urban MObility - User Documentation.
12. Dowling R, Skabardonis A, Alexiadis V. Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume III: Guidelines for applying
Traffic Microsimulation Software Washington D.C: U.S. Department of Transportation; 2004.
13. Holmes S. RMS Error. [Online].; 2000 [cited 2012 June 21. Available from: http://wwwstat.stanford.edu/~susan/courses/s60/split/node60.html.
14. Behrisch M, Bieker L, Erdmann J, Krajzweicz D. SUMO - Simulation of Urban MObility An
Overview. Berilin, Germany: Institute of Transportation Systems German Aerospace Center;
2011. Report No.: ISBN: 978-1-61208-169-4.
58
15. Bieker L. Emergency Vehicle prioritization using Vehicle to-Infrastructure Communication. In

Young Researchers Seminar 2011 (YRS2011); 2011; Vienna, Austria.
16. Bieker L, Krajzewicz D. Evaluation of opening Bus Lanes for private Traffic triggered via V2X
Communication; 2011.
17. Olstam JJ, Tapani A. Comparison of Car-following models. Sweden: Swedish National Road and
Transport Research Institute; 2004.
18. TSS-Transport Simulation System. Aimsun 6.1 User's Manual. June 2010..
19. Krausszlig S. sourceforge.net. [Online].; 1998 [cited 2012 April 19. Available from:
http://sumo.sourceforge.net/pdf/KraussDiss.pdf.
20. German Aerospace Center. sumo.sourceforge.net. [Online].; 2011 [cited 2012 05. Available from:
http://sumo.sourceforge.net/doc/current/docs/userdoc/Networks/SUMO_Road_Networks.html
.
21. TSS-Transport Simulation System. Aimsun 6.1 Users Manual TSS-Transport Simulation Systems
SL, editor.: TSS-Transport Simulation Systems, S.L; 2010.
22. Krajzewicz D, Hertkorn G, Wagner P. SUMO (Simulation of Urban MObility) An open-source
traffic simulation. Berlin: German Aerospace Centre.
23. Lansdowne A. Traffic Simulation using Agent-Based Modelling England: University of the West of
England; 2006.
24. System IoT. SUMO - Simulation of Urban MObility. [Online].; 2012 [cited 2012 April 19. Available
from: http://sumo.sourceforge.net/doc/current/docs/userdoc/index.html.
25. Fox K. Introduction to Micro-simulation. [Online]. [cited 2012 January 9. Available from:
http://www.microsimulation.drfox.org.uk/intro.html.
26. Barcel J, Ferrer J, Garca D, Grau R, Forian M, Chabini I, et al. Microscopic Traffic Simulation for
ATT Systems Analysis A Parallel Computing Version France: Centre de Recherche sur les
Transports; 1998.
27. Krauss S. Microscopic Modeling of Traffic Flow: Investigation of Collision Free Vehicle Dynamics
Koln: Universitat zu Koln; 1998.
59
APPENDIXES
A. SUPPLIED DEMAND DATA
1) Morning Demand (entrance Detectors)
Time
Detector
2,305
6:30:00 - 6:35:00
6:36:00 - 6:40:00
6:41:00 - 6:45:00
6:46:00 - 6:50:00
6:51:00 - 6:55:00
6:56:00 - 7:00:00
7:01:00 - 6:05:00
7:06:00 - 7:10:00
7:11:00 - 7:15:00
7:16:00 - 7:20:00
7:21:00 - 7:25:00
7:26:00 - 7:30:00
7:31:00 - 7:35:00
7:36:00 - 7:40:00
7:41:00 - 7:45:00
7:46:00 - 7:50:00
7:51:00 - 7:55:00
7:56:00 - 8:00:00
8:01:00 - 8:05:00
8:06:00 - 8:10:00
8:11:00 - 8:15:00
8:16:00 - 8:20:00
8:21:00 - 8:25:00
8:26:00 - 8:30:00
Flow
130
153
156
172
162
170
175
152
139
174
166
143
139
170
138
152
142
160
152
152
149
137
141
119
3643
1,845
Speed
67,36
64,4
64,1
61
64,3
63,3
62,4
60,4
61,7
60,7
59,6
60,4
64,3
61
62,9
61,3
61,9
60,6
60,3
61,7
61,5
63,5
62,9
63,4
Flow
320
255
291
300
262
261
267
239
240
254
257
269
272
262
275
287
242
247
243
222
147
144
135
124
5815
3,270
Speed
72,94
73,53
71,93
73,60
73,53
72,33
70,33
72,13
71,47
70,67
70,40
67,80
69,47
71,13
70,67
67,73
71,67
70,13
71,93
50,40
20,60
20,40
18,33
18,80
Flow
314
296
293
292
291
292
309
252
212
198
199
249
212
213
175
167
261
180
168
165
240
133
214
173
5498
Speed
65,25
67,5
56,65
37,3
36
36,9
37,7
33,05
27,55
29,1
29,65
28,7
28,65
30,9
25,35
28,1
28,15
25,65
29,45
37,2
30,7
23,15
31,25
29,9
2) Morning Demand (Exit Detectors)

Time
6:30:00 - 6:35:00
6:36:00 - 6:40:00
6:41:00 - 6:45:00
6:46:00 - 6:50:00
6:51:00 - 6:55:00
6:56:00 - 7:00:00
7:01:00 - 6:05:00
7:06:00 - 7:10:00
7:11:00 - 7:15:00
7:16:00 - 7:20:00
7:21:00 - 7:25:00
7:26:00 - 7:30:00
7:31:00 - 7:35:00
7:36:00 - 7:40:00
7:41:00 - 7:45:00
7:46:00 - 7:50:00
7:51:00 - 7:55:00
7:56:00 - 8:00:00
8:01:00 - 8:05:00
8:06:00 - 8:10:00
8:11:00 - 8:15:00
8:16:00 - 8:20:00
8:21:00 - 8:25:00
8:26:00 - 8:30:00
Total
2300e
Flow
Speed
11
72,00
9
66,00
11
70,00
4
73,00
14
74,00
25
71,00
23
68,50
11
74,00
11
70,00
8
73,00
0
0,00
0
0,00
22
67,33
11
75,00
14
69,50
5
68,00
4
74,00
15
69,00
7
74,50
12
62,00
10
59,50
23
58,25
17
63,50
8
62,50
275
Detector
23,495
Flow
Speed
76
67,5
72
67,8
71
66,2
98
63,6
93
64
98
63,2
93
65,2
83
65,4
74
62,2
88
63
73
64,6
91
62,6
71
68,4
88
60,2
75
65,4
90
63
69
64,6
64
64,2
95
60
81
63
81
62,4
65
63,4
71
63,4
64
64,2
1924
3,015h
Flow
Speed
51
76,33
40
76,6
48
73,4
63
73,2
52
71,2
57
72,6
56
73,4
66
69,2
65
63,4
62
68,8
67
67,6
67
65,4
63
62,2
65
66,2
66
62,2
69
63,8
63
64,2
60
63
54
66,2
59
61,8
58
65,8
55
63,4
52
67
44
66
1402
23,49
Flow
Speed
65
68,2
90
65,8
77
66
76
66,2
84
64,4
68
67,2
81
64,4
75
64,2
70
61,6
81
63
91
60,4
75
62,2
70
66
78
63,8
73
63,8
67
64,2
77
63
92
61,8
71
62,2
72
63,8
66
62,8
81
62,4
74
60,2
59
63,4
1813
3) Matrix of Morning Demand (5 minutes interval)

1
West
East
South
7
West
0
309
11
West
East
263
0
51
East
South
54
76
0
South
West
0
253
82
East
244
0
93
South
23
56
0
2
West
East
South
West
0
256
81
East
246
0
72
South
9
40
0
8
West
East
South
West
0
186
69
East
228
0
83
South
11
66
0
3
West
East
South
West
0
245
85
East
280
0
71
South
11
48
0
9
West
East
South
West
0
147
65
East
229
0
74
South
11
65
0
4
West
East
South
West
0
229
74
East
296
0
98
South
4
63
0
10
West
East
South
West
0
136
86
East
246
0
88
South
8
62
0
5
West
East
South
West
0
239
69
East
248
0
93
South
14
52
0
11
West
East
South
West
0
132
93
East
257
0
73
South
0
67
0
6
West
East
South
West
0
235
72
East
236
0
98
South
25
57
0
12
West
East
South
West
0
182
52
East
269
0
91
South
0
67
0
Matrix of Morning Demand (5 minutes interval)

13
West
East
South
West
0
250
22
East
149
0
63
South
68
71
0
19
West
East
South
West
0
114
57
East
236
0
95
South
7
54
0
14
West
East
South
West
0
148
82
East
251
0
88
South
11
65
0
20
West
East
South
West
0
106
71
East
210
0
81
South
12
59
0
15
West
East
South
West
0
109
63
East
261
0
75
South
14
66
0
21
West
East
South
West
0
182
68
East
137
0
81
South
10
58
0
16
West
East
South
West
0
98
62
East
282
0
90
South
5
69
0
22
West
East
South
West
0
78
72
East
121
0
65
South
23
55
0
17
West
East
South
West
0
198
73
East
238
0
69
South
4
63
0
23
West
East
South
West
0
162
70
East
118
0
71
South
17
52
0
18
West
East
South
West
0
120
96
East
232
0
64
South
15
60
0
24
West
East
South
West
0
129
55
East
116
0
64
South
8
44
0
4) Evening Demand (entrance Detectors)

Time
Detector
2,305
13:30:00 - 13:35:00
13:36:00 - 13:40:00
13:41:00 - 13:45:00
13:46:00 - 13:50:00
13:51:00 - 13:55:00
13:56:00 - 14:00:00
14:01:00 - 14:05:00
14:06:00 - 14:10:00
14:11:00 - 14:15:00
14:16:00 - 14:20:00
14:21:00 - 14:25:00
14:26:00 - 14:30:00
14:31:00 - 14:35:00
14:36:00 - 14:40:00
14:41:00 - 14:45:00
14:46:00 - 14:50:00
14:51:00 - 14:55:00
14:56:00 - 15:00:00
15:01:00 - 15:05:00
15:06:00 - 15:10:00
15:11:00 - 15:15:00
15:16:00 - 15:20:00
15:21:00 - 15:25:00
Flow
74
69
71
75
98
84
78
71
85
99
87
85
74
105
88
110
88
63
96
119
100
90
109
2018
1,845
Speed
64,5
64
63,1
66,2
64,3
65,6
65,1
65,7
65
64
65,1
65,3
65,3
64,3
62,5
62
66
84,6
66,9
65,2
62,7
63,8
65
Flow
311
235
259
245
243
250
228
247
268
249
243
258
260
254
260
248
297
279
313
304
311
292
291
6210
3,27
Speed
68,22
70,53
67,53
69,40
68,47
69,07
70,93
68,07
68,80
71,60
70,40
69,13
68,53
69,20
67,67
68,73
66,27
62,67
64,27
57,87
42,53
34,13
36,60
Flow
260
230
243
236
228
235
229
231
257
253
237
248
241
240
277
224
231
254
306
285
264
286
306
5801
Speed
67,5
69,65
67,8
68
76,7
76,45
68,05
67,6
76
77,15
67,55
68,45
67,4
65,95
67,45
77,65
69,5
67,7
64,5
65,8
67,4
65,2
65,05
5) Evening Demand (Exit Detectors)

Time
13:30:00 - 13:35:00
13:36:00 - 13:40:00
13:41:00 - 13:45:00
13:46:00 - 13:50:00
13:51:00 - 13:55:00
13:56:00 - 14:00:00
14:01:00 - 14:05:00
14:06:00 - 14:10:00
14:11:00 - 14:15:00
14:16:00 - 14:20:00
14:21:00 - 14:25:00
14:26:00 - 14:30:00
14:31:00 - 14:35:00
14:36:00 - 14:40:00
14:41:00 - 14:45:00
14:46:00 - 14:50:00
14:51:00 - 14:55:00
14:56:00 - 15:00:00
15:01:00 - 15:05:00
15:06:00 - 15:10:00
15:11:00 - 15:15:00
15:16:00 - 15:20:00
15:21:00 - 15:25:00
Total
2300e
Flow
Speed
25
66,20
25
69,25
28
66,50
10
68,50
13
70,50
7
66,00
12
66,00
11
68,00
23
72,33
18
70,33
28
70,25
30
68,00
12
66,50
20
71,25
23
68,00
19
69,67
35
69,25
29
70,00
18
69,50
31
68,25
59
63,50
23
69,00
46
63,25
545
Detector
23,495
Flow
Speed
47
66
45
65,6
44
65,4
45
67,8
53
65
50
66,8
53
66
40
65,2
61
64,4
51
65
53
66
61
64,6
36
67
56
64,2
54
64,2
60
63
36
69,8
49
64,6
48
67
63
63,6
69
63,8
49
66,6
71
63,2
1194
3,015
Flow
Speed
49
71,2
44
72,4
66
71,4
53
71,8
60
71,4
53
73,4
44
75,8
42
76,2
63
72
63
74,2
57
72,8
65
75
50
73,4
62
69,6
66
73,6
54
72
60
71,8
62
70,8
63
71,4
67
74
61
75,6
57
71,2
66
72,2
1327
23,49
Flow
Speed
38
71,16
30
67,6
39
69,8
31
69,6
44
67,4
33
70
25
68,2
36
68,2
23
67,8
48
65,8
36
69,4
28
68,6
44
69,2
46
67,4
39
66,6
47
66,4
38
66,8
26
69
44
71,2
61
67,6
36
69
41
68,6
34
67,4
867
6) Matrix of Evening Demand (5 minutes interval)

1
West
East
South
7
West
0
286
25
West
East
211
0
49
East
South
27
47
0
South
West
0
185
25
East
216
0
53
South
12
44
0
2
West
East
South
West
0
186
24
East
210
0
45
South
25
44
0
8
West
East
South
West
0
189
31
East
236
0
40
South
11
42
0
3
West
East
South
West
0
177
27
East
231
0
44
South
28
66
0
9
West
East
South
West
0
194
24
East
245
0
61
South
23
63
0
4
West
East
South
West
0
183
30
East
235
0
45
South
10
53
0
10
West
East
South
West
0
190
48
East
231
0
51
South
18
63
0
5
West
East
South
West
0
168
45
East
230
0
53
South
13
60
0
11
West
East
South
West
0
180
34
East
215
0
53
South
28
57
0
6
West
East
South
West
0
182
34
East
243
0
50
South
7
53
0
12
West
East
South
West
0
183
24
East
228
0
61
South
30
65
0
Matrix of Evening Demand (5 minutes interval)

13
West
East
South
West
0
248
12
East
191
0
50
South
38
36
0
19
West
East
South
West
0
243
48
East
295
0
48
South
18
63
0
14
West
East
South
West
0
178
49
East
234
0
56
South
20
62
0
20
West
East
South
West
0
218
56
East
273
0
63
South
31
67
0
15
West
East
South
West
0
211
34
East
237
0
54
South
23
66
0
21
West
East
South
West
0
203
31
East
252
0
69
South
59
61
0
16
West
East
South
West
0
170
50
East
229
0
60
South
19
54
0
22
West
East
South
West
0
229
41
East
269
0
49
South
23
57
0
17
West
East
South
West
0
171
52
East
262
0
36
South
35
60
0
23
West
East
South
West
0
240
38
East
245
0
71
South
46
66
0
18
West
East
South
West
0
192
14
East
250
0
49
South
29
62
0
24
West
East
South
West
0
0
0
East
65
0
0
South
0
0
0
B. AIMSUN CALIBRATION
1) Calibration Process Entrance Detectors
Time
23,205
6:30:00 - 6:35:00
6:36:00 - 6:40:00
6:41:00 - 6:45:00
6:46:00 - 6:50:00
6:51:00 - 6:55:00
6:56:00 - 7:00:00
7:01:00 - 6:05:00
7:06:00 - 7:10:00
7:11:00 - 7:15:00
7:16:00 - 7:20:00
7:21:00 - 7:25:00
7:26:00 - 7:30:00
7:31:00 - 7:35:00
7:36:00 - 7:40:00
7:41:00 - 7:45:00
7:46:00 - 7:50:00
7:51:00 - 7:55:00
7:56:00 - 8:00:00
8:01:00 - 8:05:00
8:06:00 - 8:10:00
8:11:00 - 8:15:00
8:16:00 - 8:20:00
8:21:00 - 8:25:00
8:26:00 - 8:30:00
Speed
67,36
64,4
64,1
61
64,3
63,3
62,4
60,4
61,7
60,7
59,6
60,4
64,3
61
62,9
61,3
61,9
60,6
60,3
61,7
61,5
63,5
62,9
63,4
6,28
13,59
15,31
13,03
60,40
54,46
41,73
1,14
0,85
51,22
1,26
1,07
9,52
7,14
2,46
5,60
5,58
0,83
0,45
11,01
0,06
9,76
5,85
0,28
3,645
13920 1,845
(Model)
speed Speed
64,86
72,94
60,71
73,53
60,19
71,93
57,39
73,60
56,53
73,53
55,92
72,33
55,94
70,33
59,33
72,13
60,78
71,47
53,54
70,67
58,48
70,40
59,37
67,80
61,21
69,47
58,33
71,13
61,33
70,67
58,93
67,73
59,54
71,67
59,69
70,13
59,63
71,93
58,38
50,40
61,75
20,60
60,38
20,40
60,48
18,33
63,93
18,80
Detector
112,70
121,53
133,00
184,98
160,73
101,04
66,52
52,33
58,94
49,33
67,12
56,00
71,44
86,25
72,02
45,45
74,38
56,72
78,59
230,66
2140,51
2381,86
2615,90
2524,77
21,931
26431
(Model)
speed
62,33
62,51
60,40
60,00
60,86
62,28
62,18
64,90
63,79
63,64
62,21
60,32
61,01
61,85
62,18
60,99
63,04
62,60
63,07
65,59
66,87
69,20
69,48
69,05
3,270
Speed
65,25
67,50
56,65
37,30
36,00
36,90
37,70
33,05
27,55
29,10
29,65
28,70
28,65
30,90
25,35
28,10
28,15
25,65
29,45
37,20
30,70
23,15
31,25
29,90
26432
(Model)
speed
66,02
64,01
64,44
64,85
65,07
64,75
64,95
65,79
67,10
68,73
66,82
66,69
67,76
67,12
66,38
67,86
66,21
68,15
68,02
67,52
66,74
67,81
68,34
68,65
0,59
12,18
60,67
759,27
844,97
775,81
742,63
1072,16
1564,33
1570,80
1381,32
1443,55
1529,64
1311,66
1683,09
1581,03
1448,47
1806,25
1487,52
919,53
1298,70
1994,65
1375,44
1501,67
34,258
2) Calibration process in Exit-Detectors

Time
23.220
6:30:00 - 6:35:00
6:36:00 - 6:40:00
6:41:00 - 6:45:00
6:46:00 - 6:50:00
6:51:00 - 6:55:00
6:56:00 - 7:00:00
7:01:00 - 6:05:00
7:06:00 - 7:10:00
7:11:00 - 7:15:00
7:16:00 - 7:20:00
7:21:00 - 7:25:00
7:26:00 - 7:30:00
7:31:00 - 7:35:00
7:36:00 - 7:40:00
7:41:00 - 7:45:00
7:46:00 - 7:50:00
7:51:00 - 7:55:00
7:56:00 - 8:00:00
8:01:00 - 8:05:00
8:06:00 - 8:10:00
8:11:00 - 8:15:00
8:16:00 - 8:20:00
8:21:00 - 8:25:00
8:26:00 - 8:30:00
Speed
71,67
71,4
70,8
71,1
70,5
69,2
67,9
70
69
69,7
66,7
67,3
67,2
66,7
69,2
66
69,3
69
67,3
67,8
68,2
70
70,5
67,9
76,05
72,78
63,18
66,92
73,19
85,88
71,18
106,99
44,53
53,99
27,18
39,05
66,09
38,77
83,79
48,86
78,88
90,15
23,28
50,63
62,67
75,62
152,33
48,25
8,17
13922
(Model)
speed
62,95
62,87
62,85
62,92
61,95
59,93
59,46
59,66
62,33
62,35
61,49
61,05
59,07
60,47
60,05
59,01
60,42
59,51
62,47
60,68
60,28
61,30
58,16
60,95
Detector
1.885
Speed
42,56
46,20
49,07
44,40
35,53
34,27
37,47
33,27
32,67
34,47
30,93
30,87
26,60
33,47
28,00
31,53
28,73
35,33
29,53
33,60
29,53
26,93
31,27
27,07
362,85
178,00
57,75
172,62
456,34
506,69
406,74
595,68
913,96
855,89
962,25
1182,29
1489,21
862,72
1278,91
1109,38
1330,00
683,52
1249,56
1027,54
1101,43
1340,78
1245,88
1255,49
29,32
26430
(Model)
speed
61,60
59,54
56,67
57,54
56,90
56,78
57,63
57,67
62,90
63,72
61,95
65,25
65,19
62,84
63,76
64,84
65,20
61,48
64,88
65,66
62,72
63,55
66,56
62,50
3.215
Speed
67,63
64,90
67,55
67,50
65,65
66,45
65,95
64,10
66,80
64,15
65,55
64,70
58,75
56,10
50,65
60,80
54,40
65,80
65,40
70,05
69,20
69,85
63,90
64,55
14,94
6,25
20,42
36,56
19,78
26,18
16,30
0,19
2,42
0,03
9,78
9,22
0,55
28,83
123,80
0,04
43,12
6,33
1,99
43,69
18,76
1,94
22,35
9,90
4,39
3) Comparison of Model Output and observation Speed in all detectors
detector 23,205 (enctrance)

70
68
66
Speed (km/h)
64
62
60
Observation
58
Model
56
54
52
50
0
10
15
20
25
detector 1,845 (entrance

80
70
Speed (km/h)
60
50
Observation
40
Model
30
20
10
0
10
15
20
25
detector 3,270 (entrance)

80
70
Speed (km/h)
60
50
40
Observation
Model
30
20
10
0
0
10
15
20
25

75
Speed (km/h)
70
65
Observation
60
Model
55
50
0
10
15
20
25

70
65
60
Speed (km/h)
55
50
45
Observation
40
Model
35
30
25
20
0
10
15
20
25

75
70
Speed (km/h)
65
60
Observation
55
Model
50
45
40
0
10
15
20
25
4) Validation AIMSUN Using Evening Flow Data
detector 23,205 (enterance)

140
120
Flow (veh)
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
10
15
20
25
Observation
Model

340
320
Flow (Veh)
300
280
260
240
220
0
10
15
20
25
Observation
Model

320
300
Flow (Veh)
280
260
240
220
200
0
10
15
20
25

Observation
Model

120
110
Flow (Veh)
100
90
80
70
60
50
0
10
15
20
25
Observation
Model

350
330
310
Flow (Veh)
290
270
250
230
210
190
0
10
15
20
25
Observation
Model

360
340
Flow (Veh)
320
300
280
260
240
0
10
15
20
25
Observation
Model
C. SUMO CALIBRATION
1) Detector 1,845
No
1,845 observed
1,845 model
(x1- x1')^2
(x2- x2')^2
(x3- x3')^2
x1
x2
x3
x1'
x2'
x3'
17,12
16,21
17,52
21,34259
19,02778
20,41667
17,8302882
7,939871605
8,390677778
17,36
16,48
17,9
21,77778
18,88889
20,61111
19,51676049
5,802745679
7,350123457
17,27
16,36
17,86
21,83333
18,33333
19,77778
20,82401111
3,894044444
3,677871605
14,71
15,32
17,73
21,27778
19,11111
20,94444
43,13570494
14,37252346
10,33265309
13,77
15,53
17,06
21,55556
19
20,72222
60,61487531
12,0409
13,4118716
14,17
15,82
17,74
21,61111
18,44444
20,22222
55,37013457
6,887708642
6,16142716
17,2
16,63
17,86
20,44444
18,05556
20,11111
10,52641975
2,032208642
5,067501235
17,34
16,66
17,87
21
18,94444
20,16667
13,3956
5,21868642
5,274677778
17,37
16,63
17,85
20,77778
18,27778
20,5
11,61294938
2,715171605
7,0225
10
17,35
16,63
17,83
21,22222
18,22222
19,44444
14,99410494
2,535171605
2,606430864
11
17,26
16,71
17,75
20,55556
18
20,11111
10,86068642
1,6641
5,574845679
12
17,37
16,56
17,85
20,05556
17,5
18,94444
7,212208642
0,8836
1,197808642
13
17,06
16,59
17,86
20,5
17,77778
19,61111
11,8336
1,410816049
3,066390123
14
14,95
16,25
17,76
20,72222
18,27778
20,27778
33,31854938
4,111882716
6,339204938
15
12,78
14,41
17,65
20,66667
18,38889
19,83333
62,19951111
15,83155679
4,766944444
16
13,57
14,37
17,68
19,77778
17,61111
19,05556
38,53650494
10,50480123
1,892153086
17
13,34
15,11
17,85
21
18,5
20,22222
58,6756
11,4921
5,627438272
18
13,78
15,93
17,89
20,38889
18,33333
19,72222
43,67741235
5,776011111
3,357038272
19
13,96
15,89
17,91
21,16667
18,88889
19,88889
51,93604444
8,993334568
3,916001235
20
13,36
14,69
17,6
12,05556
12,38889
17,55556
1,701575309
5,295112346
0,001975309
21
13,96
16,26
17,48
2,166667
2,722222
12,27778
139,0827111
183,2714272
27,06311605
22
13,79
16,21
17,45
2,277778
2,277778
12,44444
132,5312605
194,106816
25,05558642
23
12,53
13,78
17,39
2,277778
2,555556
10,44444
105,1080605
125,9881531
48,24074198
24
13,23
15,81
17,47
1,888889
2,222222
11,55556
128,6208012
184,6277049
34,98065309
1093,115375
817,3964481
240,3756321
6,74881278
5,835939114
3,164751386
3
/n
2) Detector 23,205
No
23,205 observed
x1
x2
23,205 model
x1'
(x1- x1')^2
(x2- x2')^2
x2'
16,84
17,3
18,93519
18,47222
4,38980096
1,374104938
16,88
17,32
17,5
18,27778
0,3844
0,917338272
16,86
17,3
17,61111
18
0,564167901
0,49
16,91
17,32
16,61111
17,27778
0,089334568
0,001782716
16,97
17,3
17,33333
18,38889
0,132011111
1,185679012
17,02
17,25
17,83333
17,33333
0,661511111
0,006944444
16,84
17,33
17,27778
17,38889
0,191649383
0,003467901
16,93
17,29
17,16667
16,38889
0,056011111
0,812001235
16,91
17,36
16,66667
17,61111
0,059211111
0,06305679
10
16,93
17,28
16,66667
17,05556
0,069344444
0,050375309
11
16,82
17,3
16,16667
16,94444
0,426844444
0,126419753
12
16,9
17,3
16,27778
17,27778
0,387160494
0,000493827
13
16,96
17,29
17,27778
18,44444
0,100982716
1,332741975
14
16,87
17,31
17,05556
16,83333
0,034430864
0,227211111
15
16,94
17,37
17,16667
17,77778
0,051377778
0,166282716
16
16,9
17,27
16,88889
17,16667
0,000123457
0,010677778
17
16,85
17,35
16,72222
17,66667
0,01632716
0,100277778
18
16,83
17,32
16,44444
17,22222
0,148653086
0,009560494
19
16,94
17,32
17,05556
16,44444
0,013353086
0,766597531
20
16,98
17,27
16,94444
17,33333
0,001264198
0,004011111
21
16,91
17,31
16,55556
17,61111
0,125630864
0,090667901
22
16,97
17,3
17,5
17,77778
0,2809
0,228271605
23
16,94
17,3
17,38889
17,55556
0,201501235
0,065308642
24
16,95
17,35
17,44444
17,77778
0,244475309
0,182993827
8,630466392
8,216266667
/n
0,599668881
0,58510208
3) Detector 3,270
No
3,270 observed
3,270 model
(x1x1')^2
(x2x2')^2
(x3x3')^2
(x4x4')^2
x1
x2
x3
x4
x1'
x2'
x3'
x4'
18,39
15,28
14,99
16,84
11,55
2,44
17,94
12,22
14,85
16,88
9,58
21,69
17,22
3,89
15,78
19,72
14,97
15,05
14,93
16,86
5,07
124,57
0,72
8,19
5,56
6,39
13,61
27,50
15,01
14,99
14,95
16,91
89,39
73,98
1,79
112,15
4,72
3,24
15,28
40,00
15,03
14,90
14,96
16,97
106,25
135,94
0,10
530,38
4,17
14,22
41,67
14,93
14,96
17,02
115,85
0,54
607,46
4,03
14,28
35,00
15,06
14,94
16,84
121,71
0,44
329,79
2,78
2,31
13,89
33,89
15,03
15,01
15,04
16,93
150,12
161,17
1,33
287,60
2,22
2,57
11,39
33,89
14,81
14,97
15,02
16,91
158,45
153,77
13,18
288,28
10
2,78
2,56
11,06
31,39
15,02
14,99
14,96
16,93
149,87
154,62
15,24
209,06
11
3,54
2,44
12,11
26,39
15,00
14,90
15,00
16,82
131,29
155,14
8,35
91,56
12
2,87
2,33
12,00
35,28
14,96
14,95
14,96
16,90
146,16
159,18
8,76
337,74
13
2,56
2,85
12,44
36,67
14,99
14,85
15,03
16,96
154,62
144,07
6,69
388,35
14
3,00
2,50
13,39
37,22
14,96
15,00
14,93
16,87
143,04
156,25
2,38
414,21
15
2,06
2,29
10,89
30,28
14,91
14,94
14,97
16,94
165,24
159,98
16,66
177,90
16
2,22
2,17
12,11
30,28
15,09
14,94
14,98
16,90
165,58
163,16
8,23
178,96
17
2,64
2,78
11,06
37,78
14,89
14,92
14,92
16,85
150,09
147,43
14,93
437,97
18
2,43
2,29
10,17
26,39
14,92
15,08
14,98
16,83
155,99
163,54
23,17
91,37
19
2,61
1,94
12,67
24,44
14,90
14,94
15,05
16,94
151,02
168,88
5,68
56,32
20
2,41
2,31
9,78
30,28
15,09
15,06
14,97
16,98
160,85
162,44
26,96
176,83
21
2,36
2,85
12,67
32,50
14,95
14,94
14,92
16,91
158,48
146,24
5,08
243,05
22
2,22
1,39
9,33
22,22
14,93
14,89
14,98
16,97
161,49
182,28
31,88
27,59
23
2,41
3,06
12,11
29,44
14,89
14,93
15,02
16,94
155,82
141,00
8,46
156,36
24
2,78
2,22
11,72
33,33
14,95
15,02
14,97
16,95
148,16
163,78
10,55
268,41
2.806,96
3.254,98
232,24
5.443,68
/n
10,81
11,65
3,11
15,06

Aimsun Sumo Comp

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Aimsun Sumo Comp

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Linkping University

Department of Science and Technology

COMPARISON OF THE TWO MICROSIMULATION SOFTWARE

AJI RONALDO (aliro229)

Norrkping, June 2012

Aji Ronaldo and Muhammad Taufiq Ismail

AIM AND PURPOSE ................................................................................................................. 1

STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT ................................................................................................... 3

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................ 5

Traffic Simulation .................................................................................................................... 5

SUMO (Simulation of Urban MObility) ................................................................................... 6

Previous Research ................................................................................................................. 10

VTI Comparison ............................................................................................................. 11

CHAPTER 3 INPUT DATA FOR THE SIMULATION ................................................................................... 13

Parameters of the models..................................................................................................... 19

Parameter in AIMSUN ................................................................................................... 19

Parameter of the SUMO................................................................................................ 21

CHAPTER 4 MODEL CONSTRUCTION .................................................................................................... 25

DEVELOPMENT IN AIMSUN & SUMO.................................................................................... 25

CALIBRATION AND VALIDATION ........................................................................................... 35

Calibration of the SUMO ............................................................................................... 36

VALIDATION IN AIMSUN ............................................................................................... 37

Validation of the SUMO ................................................................................................ 37

Model Output ....................................................................................................................................... 38

COMPARISON AIMSUN AND SUMO...................................................................................... 51

Result on Speed and Flow ............................................................................................. 51

Technical support .......................................................................................................... 54

CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................... 56

SUPPLIED DEMAND DATA ........................................................................................................... a

Morning Demand (entrance Detectors) ................................................................................. a

Morning Demand (Exit Detectors) .......................................................................................... b

Matrix of Morning Demand (5 minutes interval).................................................................... c

Matrix of Morning Demand (5 minutes interval)............................................................................ d

Evening Demand (entrance Detectors) ................................................................................... e

Evening Demand (Exit Detectors) ............................................................................................ f

Matrix of Evening Demand (5 minutes interval) ..................................................................... g

Matrix of Evening Demand (5 minutes interval) ............................................................................. h

AIMSUN CALIBRATION ................................................................................................................. i

Calibration Process Entrance Detectors .................................................................................. i

Calibration process in Exit-Detectors ....................................................................................... j

Comparison of Model Output and observation Speed in all detectors .................................. k

Validation AIMSUN Using Evening Flow Data ......................................................................... o

SUMO CALIBRATION ................................................................................................................... s

Detector 1,845 ........................................................................................................................ s

Detector 23,205 .......................................................................................................................t

Detector 3,270 ........................................................................................................................ u

Advanced Interactive Micro-Simulation for Urban and Non-urban network

Simulation of Urban Mobility

Mean Square Error

Root Mean Square Error

1.2. AIM AND PURPOSE

1.5. AREA OF RESEARCH

Figure 1. Area of research. (2)

Figure 2.Detailed picture of research area (2)

Figure 3. Detailed picture (3)

1.6. STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Traffic Simulation

Meso-scopic simulation model

Microscopic simulation model

Map of the area (preferably in .DXF format)

d. Public transport plans.

2.3. SUMO (Simulation of Urban MObility)

Figure 4. Building a network (11)