Live data from Hacker News

Ants show that emergency exits can work better when they’re obstructed

nautil.us

11–18 of 18 posts

Re: Ants show that emergency exits can work better when they’re obstructed

#11
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It basically reduces deadlock chance. When you have one exit and it's blocked due to many people attempting to fit at once, the entire queue is congested. That barrier turns one exit into two exits (even if it's backed by only one real exit). If one is congested, people can still flow through the other one, and vice versa. This explains why the evacuation rate is roughly twice faster. If the barrier is designed to ev…

"And this would be some heuristic which orders people in an unambiguous way, so only one person is attempting to exit at a given moment." Given how badly people behave at four-way stop signs (where there's an unambiguous ordering algorithm that most drivers seem to ignore), I don't think there's much hope for a heuristic ordering working well for panicked crowds at emergency exits.

Are you sure it's unambiguous? Four way stops have both a "whoever was here first goes" rule and a "we arrived at approximately the same time so the person on the right goes" rule. That alone adds ambiguity, as they're not well defined.

But it gets worse than that, as pedestrians have priority and can break up the established order. If it's "my" turn, but a pedestrian blocks only my way, someone else can rightly cross out of turn, but then once the pedestrian is clear when does it become my turn again?

Re: Ants show that emergency exits can work better when they’re obstructed

#12
It would seem to me that the visual obstruction of the column causes as much as the physical obstruction. An interesting twist on the experiement would be to construct a clear obstruction that people could see through - and see if that impeded the flow because of impatience at being nearly outside.

Also I wonder if a fake wall with 5 exit doors in it (close to each other), that obscured the one actual exist would speed up flow - presuming people selecting the general area of the exit first, then the detail of the exit point second. If there were 5 single doors it would separate the flow to the actual choke point, but without producing the same type of barricade.

If this research turned out to be widely applicable, I wonder if placing airline staff in front of a door would speed the exit of people through it?

I also suspect there is an optimum shape for the obstruction, and I expect that it isn't round.

All interesting stuff.

Re: Ants show that emergency exits can work better when they’re obstructed

#13
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"And this would be some heuristic which orders people in an unambiguous way, so only one person is attempting to exit at a given moment." Given how badly people behave at four-way stop signs (where there's an unambiguous ordering algorithm that most drivers seem to ignore), I don't think there's much hope for a heuristic ordering working well for panicked crowds at emergency exits.

Are you sure it's unambiguous? Four way stops have both a "whoever was here first goes" rule and a "we arrived at approximately the same time so the person on the right goes" rule. That alone adds ambiguity, as they're not well defined. But it gets worse than that, as pedestrians have priority and can break up the established order. If it's "my" turn, but a pedestrian blocks only my way, someone else can rightly cros…

I moved to the US four years ago from the UK, and I think four way stops are wonderful. I've yet to experience the disorder suggested. I grip the wheel, narrow my eyes and approach with extreme caution. I like think everyone else does too.

Re: Ants show that emergency exits can work better when they’re obstructed

#14
Interesting application. The idea's not new: wasn't the central thingy in the concourse in Grand Central Station found to have exactly this effect? Without it, people dither and take longer to cross a clear space - paradoxical, but that's science for you.

Re: Ants show that emergency exits can work better when they’re obstructed

#15
That's actually pretty much common knowledge with experts studying people flows and emergency evacuations.

If you're interested in the subject The New Yorker has a fascinating read on the subject (CRUSH POINT - When large crowds assemble, is there a way to keep them safe? [2011]) which makes this argument. (Warning! It's long)

Re: Ants show that emergency exits can work better when they’re obstructed

#16

That's actually pretty much common knowledge with experts studying people flows and emergency evacuations. If you're interested in the subject The New Yorker has a fascinating read on the subject (CRUSH POINT - When large crowds assemble, is there a way to keep them safe? [2011]) which makes this argument. (Warning! It's long)

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/02/07/110207fa_fact_...

Re: Ants show that emergency exits can work better when they’re obstructed

#17

That's actually pretty much common knowledge with experts studying people flows and emergency evacuations. If you're interested in the subject The New Yorker has a fascinating read on the subject (CRUSH POINT - When large crowds assemble, is there a way to keep them safe? [2011]) which makes this argument. (Warning! It's long)

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/02/07/110207fa_fact_...

Thanks.

Hanging my head in shame for the omitted link.

Sorry for the oversight, since it's a really interesting read.

Re: Ants show that emergency exits can work better when they’re obstructed

#18

Interesting application. The idea's not new: wasn't the central thingy in the concourse in Grand Central Station found to have exactly this effect? Without it, people dither and take longer to cross a clear space - paradoxical, but that's science for you.

Precisely what I was going to comment about. I think that leverages similar principles although the application is slightly different.
Post reply on HN