Re: [sumo-user] opposite lane and "unexpected ends", stops, collisions

[Jakob Erdmann <namdre.sumo@xxxxxxxxx>]

Looking at your previous mail, I'm guessing the situation could be caused by asymmetrical <neigh> definitions. Those aren't tested but I don't think they would work at the moment.

My best guess:

- asymmetrical neigh definitions prevent changing back from the opposite side

- this causes vehicles to have head-on collisions (from not changing back)

- it may also cause emergency stops

- high decelerations of an emergency stop can cause rear-end collisions

regards,

Jakob

Am Di., 29. Sept. 2020 um 10:54 Uhr schrieb Richter Gerald <Gerald.Richter@xxxxxxxxx>:

Hi,

when running a rural net with opposite lane overtake enabled in certain
parts,
I get quite a few surprised vehicles, indicated by

"Warning: Unexpected end of opposite lane for vehicle 'v' at lane 'l',
time=t"

So there probably is some lack of foresight in the behavior of those
vehicles.
* why is that?
* what are the consequences for my simulation?
* and when does it interfere with my results?

Also, I get this summary:
Vehicles:
  Inserted: 19529
  Running: 30
  Waiting: 0
Teleports: 33 (Collisions: 33)
Emergency Stops: 38
Persons:
  Inserted: 1134
  Running: 0

In principle I'd like to ask the same questions about those collisions
as above.

Thanks, regards
Gerald

_______________________________________________
sumo-user mailing list
sumo-user@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/sumo-user