Yaya Geçitlerinde Yaya-Yaya ve Yaya-Araç Etkileşimleri ile Diğer Faktörlerin Geçiş Hızına Etkisinin Mikro Düzey İncelenmesi

Year 2021, Volume: 13 Issue: 1, 113 - 126, 18.01.2021

Ayşe Ünal , Meltem Saplioglu

https://doi.org/10.29137/umagd.736604

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Yaya geçitleri, sinyalizasyonlu kavşakların emniyet ve hareketlilik performansında önemli bir rol oynamaktadır. Yaya geçitlerinin iyileştirilmesinde geçiş hızının hesaplanması önemlidir. Uygulamada, farklı yaya geçitlerinde farklı ortalama yaya geçiş hızları etkili olabilmektedir. Tasarım hızlarının da yapılan çalışmalarda farklılık göstermesi, en uygun tasarımların sağlanması için yerel yaya geçiş hızları hesaplanması ihtiyacını desteklemektedir.

Çalışmada, Mersin ili şehir merkezinde seçilen sinyalizasyonlu yaya geçidinde yaya hızlarını etkileyen faktörler mikro düzeyde incelenmiştir. 1868 yaya geçişi için yapılan istatistiksel analiz sonucunda; cinsiyet, yaş, grup davranışı, elinde yük durumu, telefonla meşguliyet, trafik ve yaya hacminin yaya geçiş hızları üzerinde etkileri incelenmiştir. Ortalama geçiş hızı 1.14 m/sn hesaplanmıştır. Hız üzerinde etkili bireysel durumların; yaş, grup davranışı ve elinde yük bulunması faktörleri olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca, asıl araştırılan konu sinyal etkisi, yön faktörü ve yaya-araç etkileşim faktörleri istatistiksel yöntemlerle ve kümülatif yüzde geçiş hızı grafikleriyle incelenmiştir. Beklenilenin aksine kuralsız geçen yayalar ile açılı geçiş davranışı sergileyen yayaların, kurallı ve normal geçen yayalara göre düşük geçiş hızına sahip olduğu görülmüştür. Yaya geçidi tasarımında, veri toplanırken araç-yaya etkileşiminin göz önünde bulundurulması; yayaların çapraz ve kural dışı geçişlerinin azaltılması, korkuluklarının genişliğinin doğru ayarlanması gerekmekte olduğu hesaplarla ortaya konmuştur. Ek olarak, yaya hızı üzerinde etkili olan yaya geçidi genişliğinin doğru tespitinin yapılması önem arz etmektedir.

Keywords

Sinyalizasyonlu Kavşak, Yaya Hızı, Bağımsız t-testi, ANOVA, Araç-Yaya Etkileşimi

Thanks

Mersin Ulaşım Daire Başkanlığı-Ulaşım Koordinasyon Merkezi’ne (UKOME), seçilen yaya geçidindeki video-kamera görüntülerinin alınmasında verdikleri destek için teşekkür ederiz.

Micro-level Investigation of the Effects for Pedestrian-Pedestrian and Pedestrian-Vehicle Interactions and Other Factors on Crossing Speed in Pedestrian Crossings

Abstract

Pedestrian crossings play an important role in the safety and mobility performance of signalized intersections. In improving pedestrian crossings, it is important to calculate the crossing speed. In practice, different average pedestrian crossing speeds can be effective in different pedestrian crossings. The differences in the design speeds also support the need to calculate local pedestrian crossing speeds in order to provide the most suitable designs.

In the study, factors affecting pedestrian speeds at the selected signalized pedestrian crossing in Mersin city center were examined at a micro level. As a result of statistical analyses for the 1868 pedestrian crossing, the effects of gender, age, group behaviour, load condition in hand, telephone preoccupation, traffic and pedestrian volume on pedestrian crossing speeds were examined. The average crossing speed was calculated at 1.14 m/s. Individual situations affecting speed were found to be factors such as age, group behavior and having loads in hand. In addition, the actual subject studied was the signal effect, direction factor, and pedestrian-vehicle interaction factors studied by statistical methods and cumulative percentage pass rate graphs. Contrary to what is expected, pedestrians who exhibit angle crossing behavior with unregulated pedestrians have a lower crossing speed than canonical and normal passing pedestrians. In pedestrian crossing design, considering vehicle-pedestrian interaction while collecting data; It has been revealed by calculations that the cross and illegal crossings of pedestrians should be reduced and the width of the railings should be adjusted correctly. In addition, it is important to accurately determine the width of the crosswalk, which has an impact on the speed of the pedestrian.

Keywords

Signalized Intersection, Pedestrian Speed, Independent t-test, ANOVA, Vehicle-Pedestrian Interaction

References

• Akgüngör, A.P. (2007). Road traffic accidents and safety programme in Turkey. International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion, 14(2), 119-121.
• Alhajyaseen W.K.M., Asano, M., Nakamura, H., & Kang, N. (2011). Gap acceptance models for left-turning vehicles facing pedestrians at signalized crosswalks. Presented at the 3rd International Conference on Road Safety and Simulation RSS2011, Transportation Research Board TRB, 16.
• Alhajyaseen, W.K.M., Asano, M., & Nakamura, H. (2013). Left-turn gap acceptance models considering pedestrian movement characteristics. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 50, 175– 185.
• Asano, M.I., Alhajyaseen, W.K.M., & Nakamura, H. (2015). Analysis and modeling of pedestrian crossing behavior during the pedestrian flashing green ınterval. IEEE Transactıons On Intellıgent Transportatıon Systems, 16(2).
• Asher, L., Aresu, M., Falaschetti, E., & Mindell, J. (2012). Most older pedestrians are unable to cross the road in time: a crosssectional study. Age Ageing, 41(5), 690–694.
• Bennett, S., Felton, A., & Akçelik, R. (2001). Pedestrian movement characteristics at signalized intersections, 23rd Conference of Australian Institutes of Vehicles, Transportation Research Board.
• Chandraa, S., & Bhartib, A.S. (2013). Speed distribution curves for pedestrians during walking and crossing. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 104, 660 – 66.
• Chu, X., Guttenplan, M., & Baltes, M.R. (2004). Why people cross where they do: The role of street environment. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, 3–10.
• Cresswell, C., Griffiths, J.D., & Hunt, J.G. (1978). Site evaluation of a pelican crossing simulation model. Traffic Engineering and Control, 19, 546–549.
• Cynecki, M.J. (1980). Development of conflicts analysis technique for pedestrian crossings. Transportation Research Record, 743, 12-20.
• Daamen, W., & Hoogendoorn, S.P. (2007). Pedestrian free speed behavior in crossing flows. In Traffic and Granular Flow, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 299–304.
• Díaz, E.M. (2002). Theory of planned behavior and pedestrians’ intentions to violate traffic regulations. Transportation Research Part F, 5(3), 169–175.
• Dündar, S, (2016). Analysis of pedestrian crossing speed - The case of İstanbul. ICE Publishing. doi:10.1680/jmuen.15.00036.
• Fruin, J.J. (1971). Designing for pedestrians: a level of service concept. Highway Research Record, 355, 1–15. Garber, N., & Hoel, L. (2009). Traffic and highways engineering, West Publishing Company, Virginia.
• Gates, T.J., Noyce, D.A., Bill, A.R., & Van, E.N. (2006). Recommended walking speeds for pedestrian clearance timing based on pedestrian characteristics. Transportation Research Record, 1982, 38–47.
• Granie, M.A., Pannetier, M., & Gueho, L. (2013). Developing a self-reporting method to measure pedestrian behaviors at all ages. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 50, 830–839.
• Hamed, M. (2001). Analysis of pedestrians behavior at pedestrian crossings. Safety Science, 38(1), 63–82. HCM, (2010). Highway Capacity Manual. Transportation Research Board, National Research, Washington.
• Holland, C., & Hill, R. (2007). The effect of age, gender, and driver status on pedestrians' intentions to cross the road in risky situations. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 39(2), 224–237.
• Hulley, S.B., Cummings, S.R., Browner, W.S., Grady, D., Hearst, N., & Newman, T.B. (2001). Getting ready to estimate sample size: Hypothesesnand underlying principles. In Designing Clinical Research, 2nd Ed. Lippincott Williams&Wilkins, 55-56.
• Kayri, M. (2009). Araştırmalarda gruplar arası farkın belirlenmesine yönelik çoklu karşılaştırma (Post-Hoc) teknikleri, Fırat University Journal of Social Science, 19(1), 51-64.
• Kılıç, S. (2014). Etki büyüklüğü. Journal of Mood Disorders, 4(1).
• Lee, J.Y.S., & Lam, W.H.K. (2008), Simulating pedestrian movements at signalized crosswalks in Hong Kong, Transportation Research Part A, 42, 1314–1325.
• Malin, F., Silla, A., & Mladenović, M. N. (2020). Prevalence and factors associated with pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries: case Finland. European Transport Research Review, 12(1), 1-17.
• Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, (2009). http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov (Erişim tarihi:10 Şubat 2020)
• Marisamynathan, P.V. (2014). Study on pedestrian crossing behavior at signalized intersections. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 1(2), 103-110.
• Montufar, J., Arango, J., Porter, M. & Nakagawa, S. (2007). The normal walking speed of pedestrians and how fast they walk when crossing the street. Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting CD-ROM.
• Muley, D., Kharbeche, M., Alhajyaseen, W.K.M., & Salem, M.A. (2017). Pedestrians crossing behavior at marked crosswalks on channelized right-turn lanes at intersections. Procedia Computer Science, 109, 233–240.
• Navin, F.D., & Wheeler, R.J. (1969). Pedestrian flow characteristics. Traffic Engineering and Control, 39, 30–36. Nordfjarn, T., & Şimşekoğlu, Ö. (2013). The role of cultural factors and attitudes for pedestrian behavior in an urban Turkish sample. Transportation Research Part F, 21, 181–193.
• Önelçin, (2014). Sinyalize kavşaklarda yayaların karşıdan karşıya geçme davranışlarının incelenmesi ve yayaların güvenli aralık algılarının belirlenmesi, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ege Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İzmir.
• Ren, G., Zhou, Z., Wang, W., Zhang, Y., & Wang, W. (2011). Crossing behaviors of pedestrians at signalized intersections. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2264, 65-73.
• RiLSA, (1992). Road and Transportation Research Association. Guidelines for Traffic Signals RiLSA.
• Rosenbloom, T., Nemrodov, D., & Barkan, H. (2004). For heaven’s sake follow the rules: Pedestrian behavior in an ultra-orthodox and a non-orthodox city. Transportation Research Part F, 7(6), 395–404.
• Saplıoğlu, M., & Faisal, A.R. (2020). Sinyal kontrollü ve kontrolsüz kesimlerde yayaların karşıdan karşıya geçiş davranışlarının değerlendirilmesi. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 10(2), 309-320.
• Schwebel, D.C., Stavrinos, D., & Byington, K.W. (2012). Distraction and pedestrian safety: how talking on the cell phone, texting, and listening to music impact crossing the street. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 45, 266–271.
• Tarawneh, M.S. (2001). Evaluation of pedestrian speed in Jordan with investigation of some contributing factors. Journal of Safety Research, 32(2), 229–236.
• SPSS for Windowa Paket Programı, 2002.
• Teknomo, K. (2006). Application of microscopic pedestrian simulation model. Transportation Research Part F, 9, 15–27.
• Tiwari, G., Bangdiwala, T., Saraswat, A., & Gaurav, S. (2007). Survival analysis: Pedestrian risk exposure at signalized intersections. Transportation Research Part F, 10(2), 77–89.
• Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu, (2019), “Nüfus İstatistikleri Karayolu”, http://www.tuik.gov.tr.
• Wilson, D.G. & Grayson, G.B. (1980). Age-related differences in the road crossing behavior of adult pedestrians. Transport Research Laboratory, Alexandria, VI, USA, Report LR 933.