faq 109123375

Questions on planscalcrouter

by Sashi Gurram on 2017-04-27 14:42:26

---

Assuming that ride mode is one of my teleported modes, is it possible to generate routes for this teleported mode using

<module name="planscalcroute" >
 <param name="networkModes" value="car, ride" />

Additionally, instead of using a factor of free flow car speed for the teleported speed, is it possible to somehow use the real-time average car speed? In essence, I would like to obtain a realistic travel time for my ride mode. It is reasonable to expect that the person riding a car will be subject to the same travel time as a person driving alongside him. Relevant planscalcroute section shown below.

<parameterset type="teleportedModeParameters" >
 <param name="mode" value="ride" />
 <param name="teleportedModeFreespeedFactor" value="1.1" />
 </parameterset>

---

Comments: 1

---

Re: Questions on planscalcrouter

by Kai Nagel on 2017-04-27 16:09:40

Dear Sashi,

no, probably not.  You could do "ride" as a network mode (as in your first config piece), and then still teleport it in the mobsim.  However:

• This would not work together with your second config piece (since that configures teleportation routing).  Should throw an exception.

• There is no config way to get the congested car travel times into the ride network router.  In code, it might be something like

  addTravelTimeBinding("ride").toProvider(new Provider<TravelTime>() {
      @Inject Injector injector;
      @Override public TravelTime get() {
         return injector.getInstance(Key.get(TravelTimeCalculator.class, Names.named("car"))).getLinkTravelTimes();
      }
   });
  

We looked at it some time ago but haven't found a "clean" way to define it in config.  It looks like one would need a map (in the Java sense) of which mode is defined by which other travel times, but it is not so easy to get it general – e.g. you would want to route trucks with truck speed but possibly fall back on car speeds if no truck speeds were available.  So in the end leaving it for "in code" seemed like the better option for the time being rather than inserting something that would not last in the long run.

Maybe someone else knows better.

Best wishes, Kai