Hello, - there should be no difference in vehicle behavior between running a scenario with sumo or sumo-gui - there is a known issue when trying to re-run a calibrator scenario without the calibrators (https://github.com/eclipse/sumo/issues/5826) - if you have turn-count data, I would recommend using the new routeSampler tool. It works similar to calibrators but calibrates the routes in an offline manner so you can then rerun it without calibrators. Make sure to use the latest development version because it includes additional options for optimizing the calibration with an ILP solver ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integer_programming). See https://sumo.dlr.de/docs/Tools/Turns.html#routesamplerpy
regards, Jakob Am Mo., 2. März 2020 um 11:27 Uhr schrieb Tetris < [email protected]>: > Hello, > > my goal is a realistic simulation of a part of a city (downtown, no > highway) > where my vehicle will drive a certain route so that i can test how fast it > gets from A to B. I have traffic data of all the junctions that the vehicle > will cross. The traffic data consists of vehicle counts (every hour is > summed up) from every road X to every reachable road Y of the junction. > > I got my network by using the osmWebWizard and deleting areas that are > outside of my interest. > I used randomtrips.py to get random routes in my network, then calibration > with detectors. > > What I have now is an output file with route distributions and a file with > detector output. > The detector output shows me that nVehContrib and aspiredFlow are not the > same. aspiredFlow are the same values as vehsPerHour in my calibrator.xml. > What I did then is tweaking the p parameter of randomtrips.py to get > nVehContrib to the correct count of vehicles (vehsPerHour). > > I also get many warnings that certain vehicles couldn't be removed. So the > calibrators couldn't work properly. > Warning: Calibrator 'xyz' could not remove vehicle 'abc'. > But my nVehContrib is way too low! > > Another warning is: > Teleporting vehicle 'xyz'; waited too long (jam). > > > Is this the way I should go on or is DFROUTER a better way? I thought for > meshed cities calibration should be used as it is stated in the wiki. > > > Another question I have is how can I run the simulation in sumo gui after I > calibrated it. If I run the simulation in sumo GUI while calibration I get > other results than by using command line. That's why I thought I would use > the route distribution after calibration to run the sumo GUI. But I don't > know how. There are no vehicles in my route distribution file. > It's only like this: > <routeDistribution id="xyz"> > <route id="abc" edges=".. ... ..." probability="1.00"/> > </routeDistribution> > > > This is part of my calibration.xml. There is a t0 in every flow: > <vType id="t0" accel="0.8" decel="4.5" sigma="0.5" length="5" > maxSpeed="70" speedDev="0.1"/> > > <flow id=".." begin="0" end="3600" route="..." vehsPerHour="28" > speed="13.8" type="t0" departPos="free" departSpeed="max"/> > </calibrator> > > > How can I match every route distribution with a vehicle type by using > command line? > > I know your time is valuable and I appreciate your attention. > > > > -- > Sent from: http://sumo-user-mailing-list.90755.n8.nabble.com/ > _______________________________________________ > sumo-user mailing list > [email protected] > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe > from this list, visit > https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/sumo-user >
_______________________________________________ sumo-user mailing list [email protected] To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/sumo-user
