## 5 Results Analysis
### Simulation Results for Scenarios 1-5
#### 5.2.1 Delay Time  
By comparing Tables 4-6, it can be noted that the delay time increases with the duration of the partial or complete closure of the north tube interested by a traffic accident or fire (i.e., passing from 1 to 2 and 3 h, respectively). Moreover, as expected, smaller delay times were found with the partial closure of the tube (i.e., Scenario 1) in contrast with the complete one. In the case of the complete closure of the tube, the delay time on the motorway (i.e., corresponding to the traffic flow from the Nodes A to D) is computed to be smaller when the traffic by-pass is opened--by the emergency service team in order to allow for the use of the adjacent tube for bi-directional traffic--within a time of 10 min from the start of the incident (i.e., Scenario 2a in contrast with Scenarios 2b, and 2c). Obviously, the use of the adjacent tube for bi-directional traffic led to an increase in the average travel time on the motorway for traffic flow towards the south direction (i.e., from the Nodes D to A). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & & & & & & & \\ \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{-2}{*}{**Modorway**}} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Motorway**} \\ \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{-2}{*}{**Road Segments**}} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{_Sub-Segments_} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{_Entire Segment_} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{_Sub-Segments_} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{_Entire Segment_} \\ \hline
**Road Segments** & **A**\(\Rightarrow\)**B** & **B**\(\Rightarrow\)**C** & **C**\(\Rightarrow\)**D** & **A**\(\Rightarrow\)**D** & **D**\(\Rightarrow\)**C** & **C**\(\Rightarrow\)**B** & **B**\(\Rightarrow\)**A** & **D**\(\Rightarrow\)**A** \\ \hline Length [km] & 8.104 & 8.872 & 7.778 & 24.754 & 7.815 & 8.837 & 8.022 & 24.674 \\ Average Speed [km/h] & 116.72 & 118.35 & 121.22 & 118.69 & 115.95 & 116.17 & 118.46 & 116.84 \\ Average Travel Time [min] & 4.166 & 4.498 & 3.850 & 12.514 & 4.044 & 4.564 & 4.063 & 12.671 \\ \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{-2}{*}{**Major ruralroad**}} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Minor rural roads**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Motorway junctions**} \\ \hline
**Road Segments** & **E**\(\Leftrightarrow\)**I** & **F**\(\Leftrightarrow\)**M** & **G**\(\Leftrightarrow\)**N** & **H**\(\Leftrightarrow\)**O** & **I**\(\Leftrightarrow\)**P** & **B**\(\Leftrightarrow\)**E** & **L**\(\Leftrightarrow\)**C** \\ \hline Length [km] & **7.800** & 7.052 & 7.075 & 7.091 & 6.182 & 0.694 & 0.682 \\ Average Speed [km/h] & **69.50** & 69.50 & 69.50 & 69.50 & 69.50 & 40.00 & 40.00 \\ Average Travel Time [min] & **6.734** & 6.088 & 6.108 & 6.122 & 5.337 & 1.041 & 1.023 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Simulation results: average speed, and average travel time in ordinary functionality of the north tube without any disruptive event (i.e., Scenario 0). The first part of Table 3 reports the results related to the road segments characterized by unidirectional traffic (i.e., those of the motorway); whereas the second part of Table 3 refers to the road segments interested by bi-directional traffic (e.g., the major and minor rural roads) and motorway junctions. From Tables 4-6, it is also possible to observe that when the alternative itinerary is activated for HGVs only, both in the case of the partial (i.e., Scenario 3) and complete closure (i.e., Scenarios 4a, 4b, and 4c) of the north tube, minor delay times are computed when compared to those of the corresponding scenarios previously mentioned (i.e., respectively 1, 2a, 2b, and 2c). In this respect, however, it is to be said that this reduction of the delay time on the motorway is related to passenger cars only.