## 6 Results and Discussions
### Simulation of the Monitoring and Control of Parking Lots in the North of a City
#### 6.2.4 Selecting the Level of Service in a Parking Lot System
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Arrivals**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Service**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Queue**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**System**} \\ \cline{3-13}  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Number of**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Number of**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Number of**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Average Number**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Average Number**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Average Number**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Average Average**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Average**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Average**} \\ \cline{3-13}  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Average**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Loss of**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Loss of**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Loss of**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Delay Faking Lot**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Queue Length**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Weighting Time**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**System Size**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**System Size**} \\ \cline{3-13}  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Arrivals**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Costoners**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Costoners**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Spaces**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Success**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Utilization**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(**Lq.**)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(**Wq.**)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(**Lq.**)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Time (Ws.**)**} \\ \cline{3-13}  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(**Kears**)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(**Cs**)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(**Kears**)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(**Cs**)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(**Gears**)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(**Gears**)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(**Gears**)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(**Gears**)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(**M.**)**} \\ \hline
10 & 20 & 100,349 & 83,568 & 83,277,7620 & 9,9994,22027 & 0.00577,9828 & 99,994,22021 & 9,978,10645 & 2,921,838,755 & 19,797,7526 & 5,9038,6165 \\
20 & 30 & 99,931 & 66,804 & 66,8501,2659 & 19,997,19807 & 0.014009667 & 9,995,9003 & 9,4950151 & 1,4328,1368 & 29,492,19962 & 4,452,721,938 \\
30 & 40 & 100,306 & 49,764 & 49,764,0941 & 29,99,3882 & 6,024,09501 & 9,99,975,4507 & 8,987,8498 & 9,089,8495 & 38,981,6461 & 3,877,733,173 \\
40 & 50 & 100,108 & 33,313,3015 & 33,313,0139 & 39,995,5914 & 0.1021,4176 & 9,979,8852 & 8,022,055,4784 & 6,003,1232 & 6,004,599,5154 & 3,079,593,5915 \\
50 & 60 & 100,201 & 17,798 & 7,172,8977 & 9,481,6076 & 0.768346472 & 9,92,13653 & 5,056,26181 & 3,037,9994 & 55,67,4078 & 3,378,8194 \\
60 & 70 & 100,376 & 5337 & 537,10,0080 & 57,162,539 & 4,974,243,856 & 9,268,7567 & 9,08,148,1582 & 9,099,2602 & 3,153,216,292 \\
70 & 80 & 99,434 & 366 & 0.36808352 & 59,419,09667 & 15,114,41904 & 94,88,0589 & 9,039,9597 & 58,018,0802 & 59,779,9942 & 3,0194,502 \\
80 & 90 & 100,177 & 30 & 0.02949694 & 0.4287118 & 24,464,11102 & 75,538,3898 & 0.0348911 & 0.00272807 & 6,046,4301 & 3,0688,6058 \\
90 & 100 & 99,498 & 0 & 0 & 95,814,5345 & 35,509,40611 & 6,64,095,9899 & 6,03207 \(>10^{-5}\) & 8,5,85179 & 1\(>10^{-6}\) & 9,519,514,984 & 3,0058,178 \\
100 & 110 & 99,976 & 0 & 0 & 95,624,64893 & 40,375,35107 & 9,624,698,493 & 0 & 0 & 95,624,6489 & 2,997,7352 \\
110 & 120 & 99,717 & 0 & 0 & 95,754,8046 & 46,578,0154 & 54,321,81946 & 0 & 0 & 95,754,8046 & 2,996,1860 \\
120 & 130 & 99,650 & 0 & 0 & 95,943,7321 & 50,103,8899 & 49,869,891,101 & 0 & 0 & 95,943,7321 & 3,003,4898 \\
130 & 140 & 99,978 & 0 & 0 & 95,664,685,854 & 54,102,0734 & 45,897,2657 & 0 & 9,966,4685 & 3,003,068 \\
140 & 150 & 99,822 & 0 & 0 & 95,851,42554 & 57,250,8819 & 42,571,01824 & 0 & 0 & 95,851,425,254 & 2,997,8088 \\
150 & 160 & 100,078 & 0 & 0 & 60,0719,9384 & 59,952,0041 & 40,027,9959 & 0 & 0 & 60,0719,9384 & 3,002,227,2787 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 13: Simulations of a parking lot model with an M/M/c/N queue subsystem for \(\lambda=20\) cars/h, \(\mu=0.333\) cars/h, QC \(=10\) cars, and #parking spaces = c.  
6.2.5.