| Literature DB >> 36201516 |
Mengkai Liu1, Zepeng Xu1.
Abstract
With the implementation of urban central rail transit and old city reconstruction projects, construction vehicles frequently enter and depart the urban area. And because of its large volume and other characteristics, it increases the risk probability and severity of urban traffic accidents. This study takes the transportation path selection of construction vehicles as the breakthrough point, weighs the transportation efficiency and safety of construction vehicles, establishes a bi-objective optimization model, involving constraints such as height limit, weight limit, speed limit, direction limit and traffic limit and uses genetic algorithm to solve it. Finally, through case analysis, the user preference is adjusted to conduct functional test and description of the model. The results indicate that the model has the function of transportation vehicle path optimization. In the meantime, compared with the safest route, the time-consuming of the optimal route decreases by 16% and the risk increases by 7.4%, while the time-consuming of it increases by 5% and the risk decreases by 15.4% compared with the shortest route. Moreover, the corresponding coefficients of time-consuming and safety preference can reach about 0.65, and the relevant stakeholders have high acceptance of the route. Further improvement of construction vehicle management mechanism based on path optimization is one of the limited ways to effectively improve the current situation of construction vehicle management.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36201516 PMCID: PMC9536627 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0275678
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.752
Summary of urban road risk sources.
| Researchers | Research content | Risk sources |
|---|---|---|
| Batta et al.; Pradhananga et al. | A population exposure model was established to measure road risks using the total population during transportation [ | Population quantities |
| Bronfman et al.; Wang et al. | The concept of vulnerable centers was introduced into the hazardous material routing problem, and the distribution route far from vulnerable centers was selected [ | Number of densely populated points such as schools |
| Huang et al. | Compared with ordinary roads, bridge traffic accidents are often more serious, which often lead to secondary accidents and long-term traffic congestions. And because of their large load, construction vehicles will cause a certain degree of hidden damage to the bridges [ | Number of bridges |
| Zhang et al.; Dooley et al. | In view of the traffic safety problems caused by semi-trailer turn inner wheel difference and visual blind area, the obstacle hazard identification trajectory model in turning blind area was established to reduce the probability of traffic accidents caused by turning blind area [ | Whether to turn |
| Zhang et al. | The optimization design of non-motorized lane was proposed. The hard isolation measures were used to divide the fast and slow traffic and avoid taking up the motorized lane such as take-out and express delivery, which were conducive to improving the road operation efficiency and safety level [ | Non-motorized lane on both sides of the road |
Symbol description.
| Symbols | Definition |
|---|---|
|
| Road Traffic Network |
| Node number of Road Network | |
| ( | The road between two nodes |
|
| Whether road ( |
|
| The road distance between two nodes |
|
| Number of traffic lights between road ( |
|
| Road condition complexity of road ( |
|
| The complexity of traffic flow on road ( |
|
| Road ( |
|
| Design speed limit of road ( |
|
| The actual average travel speed of road ( |
|
| Population density on both sides of road ( |
|
| Number of schools, hospitals, shopping malls on both sides of the road ( |
|
| Whether the road ( |
|
| Whether the road ( |
|
| Whether the road ( |
|
| Body height of construction vehicles |
|
| Maximum load of construction vehicles |
|
| Road ( |
|
| Road ( |
Fig 1Constraint conditions.
Fig 2Simulated path.
Fig 3Solving steps.
Fig 4Case road network scope.
Road constraint conditions.
| Constraint conditions | Constraint sections |
|---|---|
| Height Limit | There is a pedestrian bridge with a height limit of 3m in Road (1,8), while other roads have no height limit. |
| Weight Limit | Maximum load of Bridge (14,21) and Bridge (21,28) is 10t, while other bridges maximum load is 15t. |
| Speed Limit | The Road (1,2), (2,3), (3,4), (4,5), (5,6), (6,7), (6,13), (13,20) and (20,27) speed limit is 60km/h, while speed limit of other roads is 50km/h. |
| Direction Limit | There is no direction limit road. |
| Traffic Limit | Road (23,24) is a historical and cultural block, and motor vehicles are prohibited from driving. |
Fig 5Time-consuming shortest route.
Fig 6Comparison graph of objective function change.
Summary of routes comparison.
| The value range of | Route | ( | Time-consuming function parameters | Risk function parameters | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Distance (km) | Number of traffic lights | Traffic flow complexity | Population (thousands) | Number of schools, hospitals, shopping malls | Number of bridges | Number of turns | Number of non-motorized road sections | |||
| [0.00,0.37] | 1-2-9-16-17-18-19-20-27-28 | (0.25,200.34) | 8.11 | 20 | Light congestion on the (27,28) section only | 154.26 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 3 |
| [0.37,0.66] | 1-2-3-4-11-18-19-20-27-28 | (0.21,215.10) | 7.73 | 14 | 161.97 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 5 | |
| [0.66,1.00] | 1-2-3-4-5-6-13-20-27-28 | (0.20,254.32) | 7.55 | 13 | 162.79 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 9 | |
Fig 7Route comparison chart.
Fig 8Management mechanism of transportation route.