Description

The evaluation is a research project made is used for all trials. Increasingly, there were three measurement periods each two weeks lasted:

A measurement, in which the initial situation before the imposition of the Dynamax is recorded.
A first post-test, in which the situation immediately after the setting of the Dynamax is recorded.
A second post-test, in which the situation after setting a time of Dynamax i.e. two to three months later so that the road user is accustomed to them.

During the two-week measurement periods are three types of measurements were made to collect data. From these data, the indicators are derived. The three types of data collected are as follows:

Monica data: aggregated data (speeds and intensities) from sensors in the road. These data are collected at the entire process.
Resi data: metadata at the individual vehicle level. Here, for example, speeds, intensities, and time intervals at strip level and three categories of vehicles are also determined. These data are collected on a number of specific locations.
Video Data: at specific locations on the trajectory camera recordings made to study strange maneuvers, lane changes and possible accidents.

Evaluation Aspects: The evaluation of the research conducted and conclusions drawn are based on:

Flow:

Quantity of congestion: Average rate and range with intensity and number of vehicles.
Commutes Speeds: changes and adjustment in speed time to change in speed limit.

Behaviour:

Distribution across lanes
Monitoring speed

Safety:

Number of accidents
Follow times
Times-to-collision

Air Quality and Noise:

Concentration of and
Noise measurements

Objectives

To better understand the effects of dynamic speed and the behavioural aspects of dynamic speed and the behavioural aspects of dynamic speed and visualization of the consequences for the road authorities and network management.

Inputs

During the test following elements are used to inform driver

Roadside DRIP(Dynamic Route Information Panel) at the beginning route or route ends
Electronic signs with indicated current limit and sign motto proclaiming dynamic speed.
Electronic Transmitters-connections via roadside
Roadside sensors and actuators

Results

Increasing the speed in quiet hours of 100 km / h to 120 km / h appears to decrease the travel time by 7%. In the final version of the algorithm shows 39% of the vehicles to benefit from the measure.

lowering the speed limit of 120 km / h to 80 km / h, the number of exceedance days of the concentration standard PM 10 to the A58 reduced by 2 days of 24.4 to 22.5 days.
lowering the speed limit in relation to the weather conditions (rain) prove significantly improve the safety indicators. The Dynamax provides an additional speed reduction of 9 to 13 km / h
lowering the speed limit in relation to the control of traffic waves shows an average of one file per day wave actually disappear, which improves the flow. Average of 1.6 per day operation causes the file wave algorithm for a reduction of 29 hours lost in a day.
By temporarily increasing the speed limit of 80 km / h to 100 km / h just before there is a capacity file in the morning and evening rush hour, the average speed is found to go up (by 5 to 10 km / h), and the momentum is increased.

Side Effects

increasing the speed in quiet hours of 100 km / h to 120 km / h shows that safety is not significantly decrease the noise increases by 0.4 dB (night) and 0.3
lowering the speed limit in relation to air quality, the travel show having to increase about 10% and does not significantly increase or decrease the traffic safety. The noise decreases by 0.3 dB (night) and 0.4 dB (day).
lowering the speed limit in relation to the control of traffic waves safety indicators appear to improve very slightly. Changes in air quality and noise are not significant.
lowering the speed limit in relation to the weather conditions (rain) prove changes in noise and emissions negligible.
By temporarily increasing the speed limit of 80 km / h to 100 km / h just before creating a file capacity and the night does not appear to significantly alter the security. The noise seems to increase very slightly by 0.2 dB.

Limitations

Failures of Trails: During the trials were failures (including the MTM system) regularly. This is detrimental to the effectiveness of the measures.
Insufficient data collected: Availability of lower absolute values result in statistically non-firm conclusions especially with respect to accidents and safety indicators.
Manner of Presentation: The manner of presentation of dynamic speed i.e. not above the roads, but by road signs along the way.
Less stringent enforcement: More strict implementations of law in order to support acceptance of road user, thereby reducing the side effects of behavioural aspects.
Cost of up scaling: Further improvements in terms collection and transmission and storage of the dynamic data collected in order to integrate it with smartphones would require expensive infrastructure.

Recommendations

As a part of upscaling it would be recommended to make it available via navigation systems or as an application in smartphones or experimental on-board units.
Better enforcement and good communications with drivers: By stricter implementation to ensure higher compliance and by good public communication campaigns through the media and motto signs along the road side, driver better understands the intent of measure and better follow action.
A possible up-scaling by introducing Red X and by creating unique visual warning signs to clear path for emergency vehicles. The driver of the emergency vehicle can activate the visual representation alerting the car drivers to make way. This is also an efficient way to avoid traffic congestion due to blockage of lanes.
The technique has been successfully and traffic and the later has been implemented recently is Los Angeles U.S.A.