Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

“Emilia” tunnel cross-section, all the dimensions are specified in [mm].

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Short characteristics of all performed experiments including estimated visibility, group familiarity with tunnel and tasks for participants.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Experiment configuration.

Bus with participants were stopped in the left lane, in the middle between the second and third evacuation tunnel entrance. Smoke generators were located in front of the bus. Please note, that in order to improve readability of this figure we use different vertical and horizontal scaling. Due to the same reasons, the size of the bus is out of scale. All dimensions are listed in millimeters [mm].

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Comparison of representative visibility level in experiments 0-3, consecutively at Fig 3 A-D.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Consecutive stages of path selection by participants during experiment 1.

Fig 4 A: The first person is leaving the bus (t = 37s). Fig 4 B: The group of first four evacuees is looking around and discussing (t = 44s). Fig 4 C: Path selection. A student can be seen on the left pointing the path of evacuation (t = 55s). Fig 4 D: Latter stage of evacuation, subsequent persons leaving the bus follow the rest of participants (t = 71s).

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Consecutive stages of path selection by participants during experiment 4.

Views from a thermal camera. Fig 5 A: First participants leave the bus (t = 8s). A collision occurs between participants in front of the bus. Fig 5 B: Different evacuation path selection between small groups from front and rear door at the beginning (t = 10s). Fig 5 C: In a latter part of experiment, most of the evacuees form an organized group, and head together to the same exit. (t = 24s). Fig 5 D: When last persons leave the bus, the evacuees outflow from bus decreased (t = 41s), as a result groups of pedestrians again choose different evacuation routes.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Flow of evacuees during experiment 0.

The chart illustrates the appearance time of evacuees at consecutive checkpoints: bus door, entry to cross-passage and exit from evacuation tunnel.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Flow of evacuees during experiment 1.

The chart illustrates the appearance time of evacuees at consecutive checkpoints: bus door, entry to cross-passage and exit from evacuation tunnel.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Fig 8.

Flow of evacuees during experiment 2.

The chart illustrates the appearance time of evacuees at consecutive checkpoints: bus door, entry to cross-passage and exit from evacuation tunnel.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Fig 9.

Flow of evacuees during experiment 3.

The chart illustrates the appearance time of evacuees at consecutive checkpoints: bus door, entry to cross-passage and exit from evacuation tunnel.

More »

Fig 9 Expand

Fig 10.

Location of checkpoints (bus door, cross-passage and exit) where evacuees’ flow was measured in experiments 0-3.

Figure also shows the numbers of cross-passages between the main and the evacuation tunnel.

More »

Fig 10 Expand

Table 2.

Movement speed for the main and the evacuation tunnel for experiments 1-3.

First 9 persons, who stopped and discussed after leaving the bus during experiment 1 were excluded from the statistics.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Movement speed in main tunnel as a percentage of the desired speed (movement speed in the evacuation tunnel).

In experiment 2, the first six persons decided to run in the main tunnel and then walk in the evacuation tunnel, this allows them to achieve a higher speed in the main tunnel. We consider it as a different desired speed in different part of the tunnel, and we present two versions of experiment 2 analysis (with and without “runners”). Similarly to the assumptions in section 4.4, in results for experiment 1 we excluded the first 9 persons, who after leaving the bus, stop and discus which evacuation path to select (see.: 4.2).

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 11.

Dependency between the desired speed and the speed in the main tunnel in experiment 3.

More »

Fig 11 Expand

Fig 12.

Dependency between position in the bus and evacuation order at exit from evacuation tunnel checkpoint in experiment 1 (Fig 12 A) and experiment 2 (Fig 12 B).

The greener the seat, the faster this particular evacuee left the evacuation tunnel. Color scale (Fig 12 C) on both images is the same. Black spots indicates empty seats.

More »

Fig 12 Expand

Fig 13.

Feeling of fear or uncertainty among evacuees during consecutive experiments.

More »

Fig 13 Expand

Fig 14.

Problems with orientation in the main tunnel, due to limited visibility.

More »

Fig 14 Expand

Fig 15.

Grouping behavior during consecutive experiments.

More »

Fig 15 Expand