Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.

) Riku Nevala

Fuzzy Logic Tests in Finland

Field Applications, Experiences and Other Studies of Fuzzy Traffic Signal Control
Jarkko Niittymki LT-Consultants ltd. Riku Nevala HUT Transportation Engineering

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Fuzzy Logic - Properties

Combines the subjective, user-dependent variables with systematic problem-solving method
Imitates the human decision-making process Membership functions describing linguistic variables like a few, medium, a lot
5 cars can be considered as a few and lots of cars at the same time with different degrees

Rule-based decisions and simultaneous use of multiple rules

IF lots of cars approaching and a few queuing THEN maintain green Final decisions based on multiple rules of a rule set: Compromises between controversial rules and outputs

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Fuzzy Logic Decision-Making Process

Fuzzification of the crisp outputs
Membership degrees 01 for crisp inputs
5 cars is a few by 0,5 and a lot by 0,1

Fuzzy inference
Output value for each rule of a rule set
Similarity of current conditions to each decision alternative (rule)

Defuzzification: Selection of the final action

Compromise between all rules (COG, weighted average,) Most similar rule to the conditions (maximum output)

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Studies of Fuzzy Signal Control in Finland

Field experiments
Two-phase intersection Oulunkyl, Helsinki 1998 3 intersections with PT-prioritities 2000 High-class road intersection in City of Tampere, 2001

Other applications and theoretical studies

Pedestrian crossing, co-ordination and platoon recognition Studies of use of different rules and variables in isolated intersections Theoretical studies of use of different fuzzy systems in signal control

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Field Experiments: Fuzzy Logic As Part of Real Control System

Vehicle arrival data from detectors Data transfer via signal controller Traffic model

Changes of Signal Head Status

Fuzzy Control Decisions

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Field Experiments: Oulunkyl Intersection

Test site
Urban intersection with high peak-volumes Simple two-phase control

Study method
Comparison with previously used VA-control (presimulations and field measurements) Delays, travel time, stop-%

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Results: Fuzzy vs. VA-Control

Fuzzy control works better with medium and high volumes (peak hours and daytime traffic)
During low-demand original VA is better (evening traffic)
Peak hour and day-time traffic results Measurement Vehicle delay / Travel time Stops Pre-Simulation - 5 - 25 % - 7 - 15 % Field tests - 3 - 8 s. - 2 - 12 %

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Field Experiments: Fuzzy PT Priorities

Test sites
Urban and suburban intersections in cities of Tampere, Vantaa and Jyvskyl Multiphase signal control VANTAA TEST SITE
BUS

Study method
Comparison with previously used VA-control (presimulations and field measurements) Delays, travel times
BUS

BUS

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Results of Field Measurements

PT delays decreased especially on minor directions
Delays of private drivers increased, although delay / person decreased
PT travel times in test intersections
Vantaa Major street/ direction Minor street/ turning phases -9 % - 24 % Jyvskyl - 12 % No buses Lahti +6% -7%

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Field Experiments: High-Class Road

Test site and study method
Intersection in an incoming high class road (city of Tampere) Multiphase signal control with additional control functions (HVpriorities, Option zone monitoring) Comparison with previously used LHOVR-control (presimulations and field study) Delays, stop-%, unsafe vehicles

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Results
Vehicle delays similar with high volumes
LHOVRA more effective with low volumes, Fuzzy control on minor approaches

LHOVRA has clearly lower stopping percentages Number of unsafe vehicles in the option zone
Three times higher with fuzzy control: LHOVRA allows no cars in the option zone, and fuzzy allows one. No actual safety difference: rear-end collision risk does not exist with one car in the option zone.

HV-priorities: Similar results in simulations

LHOVRA better in field study (low number of observations)

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Experiences from Field

Positive experiences from field
Performance generally appreciated, PT priorities especially Seeing the actual performance in the traffic model of control system New alternative and development work is considered important and necessary

Negative aspects
Technical reliability of the pilot systems Difficulties in the technical tuning work (additional parts of the basic system: traffic model, parameters)

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Other Results
Pedestrian crossing
Lower or equal vehicle delays compared to VA-control, equal pedestrian delays

Fuzzy control vs. VA- and SOS-algorithm

SOS-algorithm clearly best with oversaturated conditions Fuzzy equal to SOS with medium volumes and better than basic VA with all volumes

Fuzzy Platoon Recognition based co-ordination

Fuzzy co-ordination better than ideal fixed co-ordination with high intersection distances and volumes lower than 1 000 veh/hour

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Current Work: Areal Control Method

Fuzzy urban traffic control (Fuzzy-UTC)
Partly de-centralised and partly centralised control Cycle time adjustment based on areal traffic demand Green time adjustment based on demand in separate intersections PT-Priorities in intersections (studies and installations later) Co-ordination based on fixed offsets (algorithm development later)

Study
Verifying the system performance in simulations System installation and field studies in pilot area

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Fuzzy-UTC: Structure
Main controller: cycle time
The most saturated intersection is compared to favourable saturation degree cycle time adjustment
Main controller Areal traffic situation and degree of saturation Cycle time adjustment
Volumes and saturation ratios Cycle times Local controller Local situation Adjustable green time Fixed green time Public transport priority Local controller Local situation Adjustable green time Fixed green time Public transport priority
Volumes

Local controllers: green split

Saturation degrees of phases Transfer of fixed green time to most saturated phase Differences between saturation degrees amount of green time reserved for green extensions of phases

Local controller Local situation Adjustable green time Fixed green time Public transport priority

Detectors

Detectors

Detectors

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Fuzzy-UTC: Pilot area in City of Tampere

Fuzzy controller installation
5 fuzzy controllers and intersection models + main controller Installation as in isolated intersections
1 Str. of Independence
University str. University str.

5
Kaleva boulevard Kaleva boulevard

Salhojastr.

City of Tampere

3
Viinikkastr. Kaleva road

Data transfer
TCP/IP protocol Modems and paircables
Tampere University

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Fuzzy-UTC: Simulations
Comparison vs. coordinated fixed and VA-control
CYCLE TIME AND TRAFFIC VOLUMES
140 120

VA-CONTROL
volume

Cycle [s]

100 80 60 40 20 0 50 100 Simulation time 150 200

FUZZY FIXED

Traffic volume profile

AREA

YVA

YK

ajon/min

2 per. Mov. Avg. (ajon/min)

2 per. Mov. Avg. (AREA)

2 per. Mov. Avg. (YVA)

2 per. Mov. Avg. (YK)

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Fuzzy-UTC: Simulations
Comparison vs. coordinated fixed and VA-control
VEHICLE DELAY IN INTERSECTIONS AND AREA
50 45 40
DELAY [s/veh]

VEHICLE DELAYS
40 35
delay [s/veh]

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 Grand Total

30 25 20 15 10 0 50 100 SIMULATION TIME 150 200

INTERSECTION

VA-CONTROL

FUZZY

FIXED

Traffic profile

Dr.Sc.(Tech.) Jarkko Niittymki M.Sc.(Tech.) Riku Nevala

Future Activities
Fuzzy control
Finalising the Fuzzy-UTC control algorithm and field installations Technical development of the system reliability and usability Updating the current fuzzy controllers