PROGRAMAÇÃO SEMAFÓRICA: UMA ANÁLISE COMPARATIVA DE ALGUNS MÉTODOS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14295/transportes.v2i1.331Abstract
O presente trabalho faz uma análise comparativa entre os métodos desenvolvidos por Greenshields, Maecke, Gleue, Pavel, Webster e pelo Highway Capacity Manual para a programação semafórica de tempo fixo em interseções isoladas. Estes métodos são classificados em dois grupos distintos: os que consideram o conceito do Headway de Saturação como referência e aqueles que preferem adotar o do Fluxo de Saturação. Todas as etapas relevantes do processo de programação semafórica são comentadas e referenciadas a cada um dos métodos citados. Como resultado da análise comparativa verifica-se que os métodos pertencentes ao grupo do Headway de Saturação são mais adequados a nossa realidade, uma vez que suas aplicações demandam menores recursos técnicos e financeiros. Entre os métodos deste grupo, o Método de Maecke demonstrou ser o mais elaborado, principalmente no que se refere a consideração da variação do volume de trafego e do cálculo do tempo entreverdes. Quanto aos fluxos de pedestres estes são considerados de forma superficial por todos os métodos. Isso significa que nenhum deles assegura o correto atendimento da demanda dos fluxos de pedestres.
Abstract:
This paper presents a comparative analysis of the methods developed by Greenshields, Maecke, Gleue, Pavel, Webster and the Highway Capacity Manual for fixed-time traffic signal settings for single intersections. These methods were classified according to two distinct groups: the first one considers the Saturation Headway concept as the basis for calculation, the second one takes the Saturation Flow as the main reference. All relevant aspects of each method have been investigated. The results of the comparative analysis have indicated that the methods which take into account the Saturation Headway are more adequate to Brazilian operation conditions, as their use require less resources and technical support. Among the methods in this group, Maecke´s has presented the best performance since it considers variation in traffic intensity and intergreen time. The treatment of pedestrian flows is considered to be superficial in all the methods which have been analysed. That means that none of these methods can assure that pedestrian flows demand is adequately satisfied.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who submit papers for publication by TRANSPORTES agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant TRANSPORTES the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors may enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of this journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in TRANSPORTES.
- Authors are allowed and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after publication of the article. Authors are encouraged to use links to TRANSPORTES (e.g., DOIs or direct links) when posting the article online, as TRANSPORTES is freely available to all readers.
- Authors have secured all necessary clearances and written permissions to published the work and grant copyright under the terms of this agreement. Furthermore, the authors assume full responsibility for any copyright infringements related to the article, exonerating ANPET and TRANSPORTES of any responsibility regarding copyright infringement.
- Authors assume full responsibility for the contents of the article submitted for review, including all necessary clearances for divulgation of data and results, exonerating ANPET and TRANSPORTES of any responsibility regarding to this aspect.
