1) Thanks. It should have been km/h and is now fixed
2) Yes. The normal teleporting rules still apply.
3) Yes. This is a known issue: https://github.com/eclipse/sumo/issues/4457
The lower step-length allows for out-of-sync action steps

regards,
Jakob

Am Sa., 20. Juni 2020 um 19:46 Uhr schrieb Jan Grimm <[email protected]>:

> Hi all,
>
>
>
> first of all,  thanks again for the helpful reply to my previous question
> – sorry to bother with a new one 😉
>
>
>
> I’m in the calibration process of a motorway section. The network contains
> a fork where a three-lane roadway splits into two two-lane roadways.
> Through traffic must merge left at this fork.
>
>
>
> Currently, I am using a step length of 0.1s with action step length of
> 1.0s. I am observing many stuck vehicles not able to perform the necessary
> lane change in time. For now, I am using the default car following and lane
> changing parameters (except for the speed acceptance, which follows a
> normal distribution for a passenger car and a truck type).
>
>
>
> While I had few problems with failed lane changes with a simulation step
> of 1s, the severity of congestion due to stuck vehicles seems to increase
> as I reduce the step length (leaving action step length the same).
>
>
>
> I have a few questions on this issue:
>
>
>
>    1. *Default value for SUMOs time-to-teleport.highways option*
>
>
>
> The doc states that when teleporting, highways are distinguished from
> other roads if its speed limit is > 69 m/s = ca. 250 km/h. Is it possible
> that this distinction was meant to be made at ca. 70 km/h instead? Is this
> wrong in the doc? Because if I use the following configuration, vehicles
> are removed quickly even with edge speed limits lower than 69m/s:
>
>
>
> <time-to-teleport.highways>0.1</time-to-teleport.highways>
>
> <time-to-teleport>300.0</time-to-teleport>
>
>
>
>    1. *What does the –time-to-teleport.highways default value of zero
>    mean?*
>
>
>
> When I do not specify a value for –time-to-teleport.highways, i.e. with
> default value zero, I still see vehicles getting stuck and waiting. In
> contrast to a –time-to-teleport value of 0, teleporting doesn’t seem to be
> disabled at all, but it seems to match the –time to teleport value. Is that
> correct?
>
>
>
>    1. *Influence of simulation step length on teleporting and/or Lane
>    Changing?*
>
> Is the teleporting and/or the lane changing behavior in any way influenced
> by the simulation step (given that action step length remains fixed)? As
> said, with a simulation step of 1.0s, failed lane changing is by far less
> frequent - I see only a few speed drops, but no stopping vehicles. All LC
> params, as well as tau and the other CF params, are at their default values
> in  both cases.
>
>
>
> Thanks for a reply!
>
>
>
> Kind regards
>
> Jan
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>  Virenfrei.
> www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
> <#m_-2264324658293371754_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> _______________________________________________
> sumo-user mailing list
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/sumo-user
>
_______________________________________________
sumo-user mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, visit 
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/sumo-user

Reply via email to