| Introduction |
|
xv | |
| Preface |
|
xvii | |
| Acknowledgements |
|
xix | |
| Author |
|
xxi | |
|
|
|
1 | (26) |
|
|
|
1 | (5) |
|
Are simulations the answer? |
|
|
2 | (1) |
|
|
|
3 | (1) |
|
Uses of a crowd simulation |
|
|
4 | (1) |
|
|
|
4 | (1) |
|
|
|
5 | (1) |
|
|
|
5 | (1) |
|
|
|
6 | (5) |
|
|
|
6 | (1) |
|
|
|
7 | (2) |
|
|
|
9 | (1) |
|
|
|
9 | (1) |
|
Understanding crowd risks |
|
|
10 | (1) |
|
|
|
11 | (3) |
|
|
|
12 | (1) |
|
|
|
12 | (1) |
|
|
|
13 | (1) |
|
|
|
13 | (1) |
|
Who are the end users of crowd simulation? |
|
|
14 | (2) |
|
|
|
14 | (1) |
|
|
|
14 | (1) |
|
|
|
15 | (1) |
|
|
|
15 | (1) |
|
|
|
16 | (1) |
|
Understanding the problem |
|
|
16 | (3) |
|
|
|
16 | (1) |
|
|
|
17 | (1) |
|
|
|
18 | (1) |
|
Understanding the audience |
|
|
18 | (1) |
|
Learning from past experience |
|
|
19 | (3) |
|
|
|
20 | (1) |
|
|
|
20 | (1) |
|
|
|
21 | (1) |
|
|
|
22 | (3) |
|
|
|
23 | (1) |
|
|
|
24 | (1) |
|
Simulations were not the way forward |
|
|
24 | (1) |
|
|
|
25 | (2) |
|
Cost-effective crowd safety modelling |
|
|
25 | (1) |
|
|
|
26 | (1) |
|
|
|
27 | (38) |
|
|
|
27 | (3) |
|
Basic planning/approval requirement |
|
|
30 | (2) |
|
|
|
31 | (1) |
|
|
|
31 | (1) |
|
Understanding the basic skills |
|
|
32 | (1) |
|
How much space do crowds need? |
|
|
32 | (1) |
|
|
|
32 | (1) |
|
Standing and moving space requirements |
|
|
32 | (1) |
|
|
|
33 | (1) |
|
|
|
34 | (1) |
|
|
|
34 | (4) |
|
|
|
35 | (1) |
|
Average area for a person |
|
|
35 | (2) |
|
|
|
37 | (1) |
|
|
|
38 | (2) |
|
The minimum is not enough |
|
|
40 | (4) |
|
Illustration of crowd density |
|
|
40 | (1) |
|
|
|
41 | (1) |
|
|
|
42 | (1) |
|
|
|
43 | (1) |
|
|
|
43 | (1) |
|
|
|
44 | (1) |
|
Keep the crowd density low |
|
|
44 | (3) |
|
|
|
45 | (1) |
|
|
|
45 | (1) |
|
Control density to reduce risks |
|
|
46 | (1) |
|
Calculating area: A problem |
|
|
46 | (1) |
|
|
|
47 | (1) |
|
|
|
47 | (11) |
|
Two people per square metre |
|
|
50 | (1) |
|
Density perspective illusion |
|
|
50 | (1) |
|
|
|
51 | (1) |
|
|
|
51 | (2) |
|
|
|
53 | (1) |
|
Standing and walking profiles: Another string experiment |
|
|
54 | (4) |
|
|
|
58 | (3) |
|
|
|
59 | (1) |
|
Doomed to repeat past mistakes |
|
|
60 | (1) |
|
|
|
60 | (1) |
|
|
|
60 | (1) |
|
|
|
61 | (1) |
|
Dangerous crowd simulations |
|
|
61 | (1) |
|
Defining `risk' due to density |
|
|
61 | (4) |
|
Conventional risk assessment |
|
|
62 | (1) |
|
Qualitative and quantitative risk analysis |
|
|
63 | (2) |
|
|
|
65 | (22) |
|
|
|
65 | (1) |
|
|
|
66 | (1) |
|
|
|
66 | (1) |
|
Planning, approval, operations |
|
|
66 | (5) |
|
|
|
69 | (1) |
|
|
|
70 | (1) |
|
|
|
70 | (1) |
|
|
|
71 | (4) |
|
|
|
71 | (1) |
|
Causation: Comparing scientific and legal definitions |
|
|
71 | (1) |
|
|
|
71 | (2) |
|
|
|
73 | (1) |
|
Proximate and distal causality |
|
|
74 | (1) |
|
|
|
75 | (4) |
|
|
|
76 | (1) |
|
|
|
77 | (1) |
|
|
|
77 | (1) |
|
Defining crowd disaster causality |
|
|
78 | (1) |
|
Causes of accidents/incidents |
|
|
79 | (1) |
|
|
|
79 | (2) |
|
Investigating a major incident |
|
|
80 | (1) |
|
|
|
81 | (1) |
|
|
|
81 | (3) |
|
|
|
82 | (1) |
|
|
|
82 | (1) |
|
|
|
82 | (1) |
|
|
|
83 | (1) |
|
Site design: Pinch points |
|
|
83 | (1) |
|
|
|
84 | (3) |
|
|
|
85 | (1) |
|
|
|
85 | (1) |
|
|
|
85 | (1) |
|
Crowd and event modelling |
|
|
86 | (1) |
|
|
|
87 | (22) |
|
|
|
87 | (3) |
|
|
|
88 | (1) |
|
Lessons from the workshops |
|
|
89 | (1) |
|
The problem with simulation |
|
|
90 | (1) |
|
|
|
90 | (1) |
|
|
|
90 | (2) |
|
External influences on crowd behaviour |
|
|
91 | (1) |
|
|
|
92 | (1) |
|
Crowd dynamics and crowd science |
|
|
92 | (3) |
|
|
|
94 | (1) |
|
Nice to look at: But is it real? |
|
|
94 | (1) |
|
|
|
95 | (3) |
|
Crowd science: The bigger picture |
|
|
95 | (1) |
|
|
|
96 | (1) |
|
|
|
96 | (2) |
|
|
|
98 | (1) |
|
Are all crowd simulations bad? |
|
|
98 | (3) |
|
|
|
98 | (1) |
|
|
|
99 | (1) |
|
|
|
99 | (1) |
|
|
|
100 | (1) |
|
Applications of a crowd simulation |
|
|
101 | (3) |
|
Simulation versus experience |
|
|
101 | (1) |
|
|
|
102 | (1) |
|
|
|
102 | (1) |
|
|
|
103 | (1) |
|
|
|
104 | (2) |
|
|
|
104 | (1) |
|
|
|
104 | (1) |
|
Least possible simulation |
|
|
105 | (1) |
|
Understanding human behaviour |
|
|
105 | (1) |
|
|
|
106 | (1) |
|
|
|
106 | (3) |
|
5 Crowd and event modelling |
|
|
109 | (30) |
|
|
|
109 | (1) |
|
The crowd management plan |
|
|
110 | (2) |
|
|
|
110 | (1) |
|
|
|
110 | (1) |
|
|
|
110 | (1) |
|
|
|
111 | (1) |
|
Modelling for a major project |
|
|
112 | (5) |
|
|
|
112 | (1) |
|
|
|
113 | (1) |
|
|
|
114 | (1) |
|
Contingency plans/simulations |
|
|
114 | (1) |
|
|
|
115 | (1) |
|
|
|
115 | (1) |
|
|
|
115 | (1) |
|
|
|
116 | (1) |
|
Continuous revision process |
|
|
116 | (1) |
|
|
|
117 | (5) |
|
|
|
118 | (1) |
|
|
|
118 | (1) |
|
|
|
119 | (1) |
|
Why develop a matrix approach? |
|
|
119 | (1) |
|
|
|
120 | (1) |
|
|
|
120 | (1) |
|
List of modelling techniques |
|
|
121 | (1) |
|
|
|
122 | (1) |
|
|
|
122 | (5) |
|
Ingress, circulation, egress |
|
|
123 | (1) |
|
Creating layers of information |
|
|
123 | (2) |
|
|
|
125 | (1) |
|
|
|
125 | (1) |
|
|
|
126 | (1) |
|
|
|
127 | (3) |
|
|
|
127 | (1) |
|
Dividing the area into zones |
|
|
128 | (1) |
|
Not all the space is used |
|
|
129 | (1) |
|
We do not have time for this! |
|
|
129 | (1) |
|
`Isn't this easier on a computer?' |
|
|
129 | (1) |
|
|
|
130 | (1) |
|
|
|
130 | (1) |
|
|
|
130 | (2) |
|
|
|
131 | (1) |
|
|
|
132 | (4) |
|
Space, time, direction, flow |
|
|
132 | (1) |
|
|
|
132 | (1) |
|
|
|
133 | (1) |
|
Simulations and risk analysis |
|
|
133 | (1) |
|
DIM-ICE: Setting the standard |
|
|
134 | (1) |
|
Modelling events and crowds |
|
|
134 | (1) |
|
Objective of model building |
|
|
135 | (1) |
|
|
|
136 | (1) |
|
|
|
136 | (1) |
|
|
|
136 | (2) |
|
Decision support analysis |
|
|
138 | (1) |
|
6 Case studies and examples |
|
|
139 | (50) |
|
|
|
139 | (1) |
|
Assessing the risk assessment |
|
|
140 | (8) |
|
|
|
142 | (1) |
|
Information theory and risk assessment |
|
|
143 | (1) |
|
HSE guidance for event organisers |
|
|
143 | (3) |
|
|
|
146 | (1) |
|
|
|
147 | (1) |
|
|
|
147 | (1) |
|
|
|
148 | (2) |
|
|
|
149 | (1) |
|
|
|
150 | (1) |
|
A picture speaks a thousand words |
|
|
150 | (1) |
|
|
|
150 | (2) |
|
|
|
152 | (1) |
|
|
|
152 | (1) |
|
Ingress---capacity---Beijing Olympics Torch Relay |
|
|
153 | (4) |
|
|
|
154 | (1) |
|
|
|
155 | (1) |
|
|
|
156 | (1) |
|
|
|
156 | (1) |
|
Manchester United Victory Parade |
|
|
157 | (4) |
|
|
|
160 | (1) |
|
|
|
161 | (3) |
|
Ingress---circulation---Lincoln Christmas Market |
|
|
164 | (1) |
|
Event---site capacity---Leicester Caribbean Carnival |
|
|
165 | (5) |
|
|
|
166 | (1) |
|
|
|
167 | (3) |
|
Circulation---capacity---The Jamarat Bridge |
|
|
170 | (5) |
|
|
|
172 | (3) |
|
Ingress---egress (shared space)---Love Parade Disaster |
|
|
175 | (4) |
|
|
|
176 | (1) |
|
|
|
177 | (1) |
|
Love parade ramp pinch point |
|
|
178 | (1) |
|
Egress---congestion---London New Year Event (Fireworks) |
|
|
179 | (7) |
|
|
|
179 | (1) |
|
|
|
180 | (1) |
|
|
|
181 | (1) |
|
|
|
181 | (2) |
|
|
|
183 | (1) |
|
5 How does the crowd move in this area? |
|
|
184 | (1) |
|
|
|
185 | (1) |
|
Egress---crowd management---Wembley White Horse Bridge |
|
|
186 | (1) |
|
|
|
186 | (1) |
|
|
|
187 | (2) |
|
7 Control room applications |
|
|
189 | (40) |
|
|
|
189 | (2) |
|
|
|
190 | (1) |
|
|
|
191 | (1) |
|
|
|
191 | (3) |
|
Four pillars of crisis management |
|
|
192 | (1) |
|
|
|
193 | (1) |
|
|
|
193 | (1) |
|
|
|
194 | (4) |
|
|
|
194 | (1) |
|
|
|
195 | (1) |
|
|
|
196 | (1) |
|
|
|
197 | (1) |
|
Understanding crowd dynamics |
|
|
198 | (5) |
|
Planning, approval and operations |
|
|
198 | (1) |
|
|
|
199 | (3) |
|
|
|
202 | (1) |
|
Modelling ingress systems |
|
|
202 | (1) |
|
|
|
202 | (1) |
|
Real-time decision support tool |
|
|
203 | (2) |
|
|
|
204 | (1) |
|
|
|
205 | (2) |
|
Is there a low-cost alternative? |
|
|
205 | (1) |
|
|
|
206 | (1) |
|
|
|
207 | (1) |
|
|
|
207 | (4) |
|
|
|
209 | (1) |
|
|
|
210 | (1) |
|
|
|
211 | (4) |
|
|
|
211 | (1) |
|
|
|
212 | (3) |
|
|
|
215 | (3) |
|
|
|
215 | (1) |
|
|
|
215 | (1) |
|
|
|
216 | (1) |
|
|
|
217 | (1) |
|
|
|
217 | (1) |
|
|
|
217 | (1) |
|
|
|
218 | (5) |
|
|
|
218 | (1) |
|
|
|
218 | (1) |
|
|
|
219 | (1) |
|
|
|
219 | (1) |
|
|
|
220 | (2) |
|
Getting people out and away |
|
|
222 | (1) |
|
|
|
223 | (2) |
|
|
|
224 | (1) |
|
|
|
225 | (1) |
|
|
|
225 | (2) |
|
|
|
225 | (1) |
|
|
|
226 | (1) |
|
|
|
226 | (1) |
|
|
|
226 | (1) |
|
Problems with evacuation simulations |
|
|
227 | (2) |
|
|
|
229 | (16) |
|
|
|
229 | (1) |
|
|
|
230 | (1) |
|
|
|
230 | (5) |
|
|
|
231 | (2) |
|
|
|
233 | (1) |
|
|
|
233 | (1) |
|
|
|
234 | (1) |
|
|
|
235 | (1) |
|
|
|
235 | (7) |
|
|
|
238 | (1) |
|
Could the accident have been avoided? |
|
|
238 | (1) |
|
Event planning: Flowchart |
|
|
238 | (2) |
|
Level 1: Report and analysis |
|
|
240 | (1) |
|
Level 2: Modelling and risk analysis |
|
|
241 | (1) |
|
Level 3: Complex analysis, value engineering, site and wide area simulation |
|
|
241 | (1) |
|
Information---education---application |
|
|
242 | (1) |
|
Why should you listen to us? |
|
|
243 | (1) |
|
|
|
244 | (1) |
| Appendix A Essential crowd safety mathematics |
|
245 | (4) |
| Appendix B The disaster database |
|
249 | (16) |
| Appendix C Web resources |
|
265 | (4) |
| Appendix D DIM-ICE meta model (summary) |
|
269 | (6) |
| Index |
|
275 | |