...
首页> 外文期刊>Transportation Research >When 'push' does not come to 'shove': Revisiting 'faster is slower' in collective egress of human crowds
【24h】

When 'push' does not come to 'shove': Revisiting 'faster is slower' in collective egress of human crowds

机译:当“推”不会“推”时:在人群的集体出口中重新审视“越快越慢”

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

We revisit the assumption stating that greater levels of rush in pedestrians' collective egress through narrow bottlenecks impedes the discharge process and makes it slower, commonly known as the 'faster-is-slower' phenomenon. The question is of great practical significance because it ultimately can translate into whether crowds of evacuees should be dissuaded from rushing at bottlenecks in order to minimise their evacuation time. Yet, there is a large mixture of evidence on this phenomenon in the existing literature. Here, we re-examine this assumption based on empirical tests with an aim to identify explanations for these discrepancies. Our experiments were conducted with a crowd of 114 individuals, under varying doorway widths (ranging from 60 cm to 120 cm) and under three different levels of (non-aggressive) rush/competitiveness. Under our most competitive condition, crowd density behind the exit frequently exceeded 8 ped/m(2) and even reached 9 ped/m(2), as may be observed in a real case of egress under severe time constraint. This elevated level of crowd pressure and competitiveness, however, never translated in slower egress even for the narrowest exit. Based on every relevant measure of movement efficiency and regardless of the door width, faster was invariably faster. Discharge rates were larger, time headways between successive exits were smaller and evacuation times were shorter when individuals pushed more intensely (compared to more orderly types of conduct). We also observed that pedestrians exited in bursts and that the burst sizes were bigger under the greater levels of rush. Overall, all measurements indicated that for moderately large crowds, as long as the competitiveness does not amount to dangerous physical pressure, and as long as individuals do not display 'explicit' or 'aggressive' forms of pushing (i.e. as long as 'push' does not come to 'shove'), rushing per se does not prolong the discharge process, rather it shortens the collective discharge. A contrast between these observations and previous experiments in earlier studies indicates that the presence or absence of 'explicit' or 'aggressive' shoving in the crowd could possibly be a major determinant of faster being slower or faster. This study suggests that the 'faster-is-slower' term, although very common in the literature, might be an overly simplistic terminology that does not offer adequate neuance for describing a rather complex phenomenon. To determine whether faster is slower or faster, one may need to break the question down into more details and view it through context-specific influential factors such as 'the nature of pushing', 'the size of the crowd behind the bottleneck', or 'the physical characteristics of the door'. We particularly suggest that another possible factor in determining when faster is slower or faster could potentially be the 'crowd size', a dimension that could be systematically investigated by future studies.
机译:我们重新审视了这样的假设,即狭窄的瓶颈使行人的集体出口受到更大程度的冲动会阻碍排放过程并使排放过程变慢,通常被称为“变快变慢”现象。这个问题具有重大的现实意义,因为它最终可以转化为是否应劝阻疏散人群不要急于瓶颈,以最大程度地减少他们的撤离时间。然而,在现有文献中有大量证据证明了这一现象。在这里,我们基于经验检验重新检查该假设,目的是找出这些差异的解释。我们的实验是在114个个体的人群中进行的,这些个体在不同的门口宽度(从60厘米到120厘米不等)和三种(非侵略性)争抢/竞争水平下进行。在我们最具竞争力的条件下,出口后面的人群密度经常超过8 ped / m(2),甚至达到9 ped / m(2),这可能是在严格的时间限制下真实出口的情况下所观察到的。但是,这种高水平的人群压力和竞争力从来没有转化为更慢的出口速度,即使是最狭窄的出口。根据运动效率的所有相关度量标准,无论门的宽度如何,速度始终是更快的。当个人加大推力时(相较于有序的行为类型),出院率更高,两次连续出口之间的间隔时间更短,疏散时间更短。我们还观察到行人突然涌出,并且在更大的奔波水平下,爆发量更大。总体而言,所有测量结果都表明,对于中等规模的人群,只要竞争力不等于危险的身体压力,并且只要个人不表现出“明示”或“激进”的推挤形式(即只要“推”不会“推”进去,冲本身不会延长排放过程,反而会缩短集体排放。这些观察结果与早期研究中的先前实验之间的对比表明,人群中是否存在“显式”或“激进”推可能是更快或更慢的主要决定因素。这项研究表明,“快是慢”一词尽管在文献中很常见,但可能是过于简单化的术语,无法为描述一个相当复杂的现象提供足够的约束。为了确定快慢还是慢慢,可能需要将问题分解为更多细节,并通过上下文相关的影响因素(例如“推动的性质”,“瓶颈背后的人群规模”或“ “门的物理特征”。我们特别建议,确定何时更快或更慢的另一个可能因素可能是“人群规模”,这一维度可以通过未来的研究进行系统地研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号