考虑右转车二次冲突的信号交叉口行人过街安全评价方法  

Safety evaluation method for pedestrians crossing street at signalized intersection considering secondary conflict of right-turn vehicles

作　　者：程国柱 盛林 王浩宇 冯天军[2] CHENG Guo-zhu;SHENG Lin;WANG Hao-yu;FENG Tian-jun(School of Traffic and Transportation,Northeast Forestry University,Harbin 150040,China;School of Transportation Science and Engineering,Jilin University of Architecture,Changchun 130118,China)

机构地区：[1]东北林业大学交通学院,哈尔滨150040 [2]吉林建筑大学交通科学与工程学院,长春130118

出　　处：《吉林大学学报（工学版）》2024年第7期1903-1912,共10页Journal of Jilin University:Engineering and Technology Edition

基　　金：黑龙江省重点研发计划项目(JD22A014);吉林省教育厅科学技术研究项目(JJKH20210270KJ)。

摘　　要：为研究信号交叉口右转车二次冲突过程中行人过街的安全性,选择云南省昆明市3个信号交叉口作为研究对象,利用交通冲突分析软件T-Analyst获取车辆轨迹数据和交通冲突数据。采用多角度的安全评价方法:基于DV框架判断人-车冲突的初始情况;采用交通冲突指标PET_(S)和PET_(H)、最大拒绝间隙与接受间隙、平均过街车速分析行人过街的安全性。结果表明:相比于次要冲突,主要冲突中行人面对的冲突初始情况更加危险,行人选择有风险过街的频率也更高。车辆的过街行为、交通冲突指标PET_(S)和PET_(H)、最大拒绝间隙、接受间隙、临界间隙等指标在右转车二次冲突中没有明显区别,但次要冲突的平均过街车速明显高于主要冲突的平均过街车速,行人过街的潜在风险在次要冲突处更高。In order to study the safety of pedestrians crossing the street during the second conflict between people and vehicles at signalized intersections,three signalized intersections in Kunming City,Yunnan Province were selected as the research objects,and the traffic conflict analysis software T-Analyst was used to obtain vehicle trajectory data and traffic conflict data.A multi-angle safety evaluation method was adopted,based on the DV framework to judge the initial situation of the person-vehicle conflict,the traffic conflict indicators PET_(S) and PET_(H),the maximum rejection gap and acceptance gap,and the average crossing speed to analyze the safety of pedestrians crossing the street.The results show that compared with the secondary conflict,the initial conflict situation faced by pedestrians in the primary conflict is more dangerous,and the frequency of pedestrians choosing to cross the street at risk is also higher.There is no significant difference in the secondary human-vehicle conflict in the indicators such as vehicle crossing behavior,traffic conflict indicators PET_(S) and PET_(H),maximum rejection gap,acceptance gap,and critical gap.However,the average crossing speed of the secondary conflict was significantly higher than that of the primary conflict,and the potential risk of pedestrian crossing was higher in the secondary conflict.

关 键 词：交通运输系统工程 右转车二次冲突 信号交叉口 安全评价 

分 类 号：U491.7[交通运输工程—交通运输规划与管理]