Re: [sumo-user] Regarding Flow Definitions

[Jakob Erdmann <namdre.sumo@xxxxxxxxx>]

SUMO parses route-files incrementally by default and therefore the begin/depart times must be sorted from top to bottom. This is violated if you define a new flow with begin=0 after another one with begin=1000.

Alternative workarounds:

- load the route file with option --additional-files  (this reads the whole file at once and doesn't require sorted input)

- rewrite the file so that the intervals are sorted

regards,

Jakob

Am Mi., 4. Aug. 2021 um 08:27 Uhr schrieb Radha Reddy <radha.reddy.ipp@xxxxxxxxx>:

Hello,

I am trying to analyze different flows, i.e., three consecutive flows injected from 8 inflow lanes of a 2x2 grid.

The initial flow definition is working fine, but when I added 2nd and 3rd definitions the following warning is occurring and vehicles are not injected to the road network.

Warning: Route file should be sorted by departure time, ignoring 'w20'!

The 3 consecutive flow definitions for an inflow pasted below. I applied the same definitions appropriate with each inflow lane. Are these kinds of definitions wrong?

Please advise me to solve the problem.

Regards

Radha

<flows>
            <interval begin="0" end="500">
                <flow id="w10" number="50" type="typedist1" route="fromWest1"/>
            </interval>
        </flows>
        <flows>
            <interval begin="600" end="900">
                <flow id="w11" number="50" type="typedist1" route="fromWest1"/>
            </interval>
        </flows>
        <flows>
            <interval begin="1000" end="1250">
                <flow id="w12" number="50" type="typedist1" route="fromWest1"/>
            </interval>
        </flows>

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