Model City 2011: 22 nd International Emme Users Conference.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
THURSTON REGION MULTIMODAL TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTING MODEL IMPLEMENTATION IN EMME/2 - Presentation at the 15th International EMME/2 Users Group Conference.
Advertisements

ZMQS ZMQS
Using the Parkride2.mac Macro to Model Park and Ride Demand in the Puget Sound Region 22 nd International Emme Users Conference September 15-16, 2011,
SE Florida FSUTMS Users Group Meeting FDOT Systems Planning Office
Parsons Brinckerhoff Chicago, Illinois GIS Estimation of Transit Access Parameters for Mode Choice Models GIS in Transit Conference October 16-17, 2013.
Feedback Loops Guy Rousseau Atlanta Regional Commission.
Iran Network and Transit Modeling and Forecasting Using EMME/2 Mahboobeh Zakeri Sohi ENTRAConsultants 21st International EMME Users Conference October,
TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTING FOR THE OLYMPIC GAMES ATHENS 2004 ATTIKO METRO S.A. Anna Anastasaki.
In Portland, Oregon TRB Planning Applications Conference Reno, Nevada Mark Bradley Research & Consulting.
Transportation and Air Traveler Characteristics Findings from the 2011 Washington-Baltimore Regional Air Passenger Survey Transportation Planning Board.
City of Toronto Official Plan - Formulating Transportation Alternatives 15th International EMME/2 Users Group Conference October , 2000 Vancouver,
25 seconds left…...
1 Unit 1 Kinematics Chapter 1 Day
1 PART 1 ILLUSTRATION OF DOCUMENTS  Brief introduction to the documents contained in the envelope  Detailed clarification of the documents content.
Forecasting Traffic and Toll Revenue for Public-Private Partnerships (P3) vs. Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO): A comparison 14 th TRB National.
Getting on the MOVES: Using Dynameq and the US EPA MOVES Model to Measure the Air Pollution Emissions TRPC – Smart Corridors Project Chris Breiland Fehr.
1 Road Pricing: Peñon – Texcoco Mexico Case 18th Annual International EMME/2 Users’ Conference October, 2004 Cuidad de México, Mexico Ing. Alfonso.
Jeannie Wu, Planner Sep  Background  Model Review  Model Function  Model Structure  Transportation System  Model Interface  Model Output.
July 22, Model Objectives Forecast ADT on the Rural State Highway System Autos & Trucks Autos & Trucks Arterial System Arterial System Complement,
Presented to Transportation Planning Application Conference presented by Feng Liu, John (Jay) Evans, Tom Rossi Cambridge Systematics, Inc. May 8, 2011.
Norman Washington Garrick CE 2710 Spring 2014 Lecture 07
The SoCoMMS Model Paul Read Dan Jones. The Presentation Outline of the Study The Modelling Framework Accessibility Model.
What is the Model??? A Primer on Transportation Demand Forecasting Models Shawn Turner Theo Petritsch Keith Lovan Lisa Aultman-Hall.
SCAG Region Heavy Duty Truck Model Southern California Region Heavy Duty Truck Model.
Intercity Person, Passenger Car and Truck Travel Patterns Daily Highway Volumes on State Highways and Interstates Ability to Evaluate Major Changes in.
Advanced Modeling Practice at CMAP Kermit Wies October 2014.
TPAC | Columbus, OH | May 2013 Application of an Activity-Based Model for Highway Pricing Studies in Chicago.
Junction Modelling in a Strategic Transport Model Wee Liang Lim Henry Le Land Transport Authority, Singapore.
Norman W. Garrick Trip Assignment Trip assignment is the forth step of the FOUR STEP process It is used to determining how much traffic will use each link.
Presented to presented by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Transportation leadership you can trust. Improving the Treatment of Priced Roadways in Mode Choice.
Framework for Model Development General Model Design Highway Network/Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) Development of Synthetic Trip Tables Development of.
Transportation in Europe and the United States: A Comparative Study Prepared by Kristen Eaton, Intern Wilmington Area Planning Council (WILMAPCO)
Regional Travel Modeling Unit 6: Aggregate Modeling.
KY 4/22 Module 1b Chapter 3 in the TS Manual Main Survey Types.
Implementing a Blended Model System to Forecast Transportation and Land Use Changes at Bob Hope Airport 15 th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to TRB Planning Applications Conference presented by Vamsee Modugula and Maren Outwater Cambridge Systematics,
Less Stop More Go EXPRESS LANES Travel Choices and Strategies to Relieve Congestion Presentation to FDOT’s Annual ITS Working Group Meeting March 2008.
Seoul Development Institute Building a TDM Impact Analysis System for the Introduction of a Short-Term Congestion Management Program in Seoul Jin-Ki Eom,
Traffic Assignment Convergence and its Effects on Selecting Network Improvements By Chris Blaschuk, City of Calgary and JD Hunt, University of Calgary.
BALTIMORE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MODEL ENHANCEMENTS FOR THE RED LINE PROJECT AMPO TRAVEL MODEL WORK GROUP March 20, 2006.
Calculating Transportation System User Benefits: Interface Challenges between EMME/2 and Summit Principle Author: Jennifer John Senior Transportation Planner.
The Use of EMME/2 by Transek – an Overview “Fantasy and imagination is the limit” by Göran Tegnér Transek Consultants, Solna, Sweden Presentation for the.
Utilizing Advanced Practice Methods to Improve Travel Model Resolution and Address Sustainability Bhupendra Patel, Ph.D., Senior Transportation Modeler.
Modeling in the “Real World” John Britting Wasatch Front Regional Council April 19, 2005.
Travel Demand Modeling Experience Bellevue-Kirkland-Redmond Travel Demand Modeling Experience Jin Ren, P.E. City of Bellevue, Washington, USA October 19,
Guy Rousseau, Modeling Manager, Atlanta Regional Commission Atlanta Travel Forecasting Methods: Traditional Trip-Based & Activity-Based Model AMPO Travel.
1 Potential User Benefits and Costs of Rising Fuel Prices in the Puget Sound Region TRB Planning Applications Conference May 18, 2009 By Maren Outwater.
Incorporating Traffic Operations into Demand Forecasting Model Daniel Ghile, Stephen Gardner 22 nd international EMME Users’ Conference, Portland September.
YONSEI UNIVERSITY Korea Emme Users’ Conference 21 April 2010 Prof. Jin-Hyuk Chung.
EMME/2 Conference Gautrain Rapid Rail Link: Forecasting Diversion from Car to Rail 8 September 2004 Presented by Johan De Bruyn.
Calgary Commercial Movement Model Kevin Stefan, City of Calgary J.D. Hunt, University of Calgary Prepared for the 17th International EMME/2 Conference.
Application of an Activity-based Model for a Toll Road Study in Chicago Matt Stratton Parsons Brinckerhoff May 19, 2015.
How Does Your Model Measure Up Presented at TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference by Phil Shapiro Frank Spielberg VHB May, 2007.
Bharath Paladugu TRPC Clyde Scott Independent Consultant
Comparison of an ABTM and a 4-Step Model as a Tool for Transportation Planning TRB Transportation Planning Application Conference May 8, 2007.
TRB Planning Applications May 2009, Houston,TX Changing assignment algorithms: the price of better convergence Michael Florian and Shuguang He INRO.
20th EMME User Conference, Montreal, October 18-20, 2006 Modeling Toll Roads with EMME Peter Vovsha, Parsons Brinckerhoff, USA Pascal Volet, TraVol, Canada.
Transportation Forecasting The Four Step Model. Norman W. Garrick Transportation Forecasting What is it? Transportation Forecasting is used to estimate.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to Florida Transit Modeling Workshop presented by Thomas Rossi Cambridge Systematics, Inc. April 8,
May 8, 2009 SERPM65 Subarea Model-Corradino 1 SERPM65 Highway-Only Subarea Modeling Process Southeast Florida FSUTMS Users Group Meeting Ft. Lauderdale,
Florida’s First Eco-Sustainable City. 80,000+ Residential Units 10 million s.f. Non-Residential 20 Schools International Clean Technology Center Multi-Modal.
An AQ Assessment Tool for Local Land Use Decisio ns 13 th TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference May 9, 2011 Reno, Nevada Mark Filipi, AICP.
Incorporating Time of Day Modeling into FSUTMS – Phase II Time of Day (Peak Spreading) Model Presentation to FDOT SPO 23 March 2011 Heinrich McBean.
Travel Demand Forecasting: Traffic Assignment CE331 Transportation Engineering.
Integrated Dynamic Travel Models: Recent SHRP2 Projects
Mohamed Mahmoud, Ph.D. Senior Planner, Forecasting TransLink
AMPO Annual Conference October 22, 2014
Validating Trip Distribution using GPS Data
Jim Henricksen, MnDOT Steve Ruegg, WSP
Technical Advisory Committee
Presentation transcript:

Model City 2011: 22 nd International Emme Users Conference

Presentation Outline Project Need CT-RAMP ABM Road Pricing EMME Implementation Pricing Sensitivity Tests Next Steps Questions

CMAP Region Population: 10.5 million Modeling Region 21 counties in 3 states Neighboring MPOs SE Wisconsin NW Indiana 1,944 TAZs Road Network 15.0K nodes 44.3K links Rail Network 6.6K nodes 19.5K links

Current Model System Four-step trip based model Fortran Trip generation Trip distribution Mode choice EMME Time-of-day factoring (8 time-of-day periods) Assignments and skimming External, truck, and airport trips Fixed trip tables SAS for pre- and post-processing Auto: SOV and HOV2+ Trucks: heavy, medium, light, and b-plate (<4 tons) Transit 7 line haul modes CTA: metro, local bus, express bus Metra: commuter rail PACE: express, regional, and local buses 12 auxiliary modes

Policy Environment GO TO 2040 Regional comprehensive plan adopted in 2010 Recommendations Implement congestion pricing Implement parking pricing Increase commitment to transit Need improved tools for testing pricing policies: ABM

Project Develop pricing (demonstration) ABM Borrow ABM from other MPOs (Atlanta, San Francisco Bay Area, San Diego, etc) Develop base year synthetic population Integrate with CMAP highway and transit networks Re-estimate/calibrate key components Destination choice Mode choice Prove usefulness of ABM; develop full ABM later

CT-RAMP Family of Models Coordinated Travel Regional Activity-based Modeling Platform Key features: Explicit intra-household interactions and Coordinated Daily Activity Patterns (CDAP) Near - continuous temporal dimension (30 minutes) Java-based package for ABM construction 7 FeatureABM4-Step Main unit of travelTourTrip Travel generation mechanism Derived from participation in activities Attributed to population a priori Structural objects for modeling Individual microsimulation of persons and households Aggregate zone-to-zone flows (trip tables)

Members of CT-RAMP Family 1 st generation: Columbus, OH (MORPC) – in practice since 2004 Lake Tahoe, NV (TMPO) – in practice since nd generation: Atlanta, GA (ARC) – in practice since 2009 San-Francisco Bay Area, CA (MTC) – in practice since rd generation: San-Diego, CA (SANDAG) – started in 2008 Phoenix, AZ (MAG) – started in 2009 Jerusalem, Israel (JTMT) – started in 2009 Chicago (CMAP) – started in 2010 Every model has many unique features 8

CT-RAMP Person Types PERSON-TYPEAGEWORK STATUSSCHOOL STATUS Full-time worker18+Full-timeNone Part-time worker18+Part-timeNone Non-working adult18 – 64UnemployedNone Non-working senior65+UnemployedNone College student18+AnyCollege + Driving age student16-17AnyPre-college Non-driving student6 – 16NonePre-college Pre-school0-5None 9

CT-RAMP Activity Types 10 PURPOSEDESCRIPTIONCLASSIFICATIONELIGIBILITY WorkWorking at regular workplace or work-related activities outside the home. MandatoryWorkers and students UniversityCollege +MandatoryAge 18+ High SchoolGrades 9-12MandatoryAge Grade SchoolGrades K-8MandatoryAge 5-13 EscortingPick-up/drop-off passengers (auto trips only). MaintenanceAge 16+ ShoppingShopping away from home.Maintenance5+ (if joint travel, all persons) Other MaintenancePersonal business/services, and medical appointments. Maintenance5+ (if joint travel, all persons) Social/RecreationalRecreation, visiting friends/family. Discretionary5+ (if joint travel, all persons) Eat OutEating outside of home.Discretionary5+ (if joint travel, all persons) Other DiscretionaryVolunteer work, religious activities. Discretionary5+ (if joint travel, all persons)

CT-RAMP Model Structure Model Re-estimated for CMAP Pricing ABM Auto ownership model Destination choice models Time-of-day choice models Mode choice models

Distributed Modeling System Main Machine Manages model run system Stores in-memory households, persons, matrices Skimming and assignment for two time periods 2 Six-Core Intel Xeon 2.66 GHz, 144 GB RAM, $10K 3 Worker Machines Solves model components (for bundles of households) Skimming and assignment for two time periods 2 Six-Core Intel Xeon 2.66 GHz, 144 GB RAM, $10K Uses Java JPPF to run worker node processes and Microsoft PsExec to run EMME processes on workers

Distributed Model System

Road Pricing Essentials Variation in Value of Time: ABM operates with a continuous VOT distribution EMME requires discrete classes (High VOT, Low VOT) Vehicle occupancy: ABM and EMME operates with 3 discrete classes (SOV, HOV2, HOV3) Route type choice: ABM and EMME explicitly treat toll and non-toll users for each segment

Advanced VOT Techniques in ABM Basic VOT estimated for each travel purpose and person type Situational variation of VOT applied for each person based on lognormal distribution Car occupancy accounted by cost sharing: VOT for HOV2 is 1.6 of highest participant VOT VOT for HOV3+ is 2.3 of highest participant VOT For static assignments VOT has to be aggregated across individuals into discrete vehicle classes

Example of VOT Distribution

Initial Value-of-Time Segmentation Vehicle Type & Value-Of- Time Non- toll SOV Non-toll HOV2 Non-toll HOV3+ Toll SOV Toll HOV2 Toll HOV3+ Auto low VOT Auto high VOT Commercial1314 Light truck1516 Medium truck1718 Heavy truck1920 External low External high Airport low Airport high

Route Type Choice Currently implemented as binary choice (toll vs. non- toll); can be extended to distinguish between managed lanes (toll vs. non-toll) and general purpose lanes (toll vs. non-toll) Explicit modeling and analysis of toll users at OD level Accounts for (negative) toll bias Allows for VOT variation / segmentation beyond 12 assignable classes

Applied Segmentation Rules Assignable trip tables are segmented by 44 classes: 12 core auto components are generated by ABM 8 truck components are handled by route type choice model implemented in EMME 12 external components are handled by route type choice model implemented in EMME 12 airport travel components are handled by route type choice model implemented in EMME

Desired Multi-Class Assignment Classes Vehicle Type & Value-Of-Time Non- toll SOV Non-toll HOV2 Non-toll HOV3+ Toll SOV Toll HOV2 Toll HOV3+ Auto + external + airport low VOT Auto + external + airport high VOT Commercial1314 Light truck1516 Medium truck1718 Heavy truck1920

EMME Implementation Constraints Currently multi-class-assignment is limited to 12 classes (will be extended soon to 30) It will be beneficial to consider more than 2 VOT classes, for example (Low, Medium, High) Possible implementation scheme: Pre-assign heavy and (possibly) medium trucks since they follow planned routes (4 classes) Assign the rest of classes with heavy and medium trucks preloaded (16 classes)

Current Multi-Class Assignment Classes Vehicle Type & Value-Of- Time Non- toll SOV Non-toll HOV2 Non-toll HOV3+ Toll SOV Toll HOV2 Toll HOV3+ Auto + external + airport low & high VOT Commercial + light truck 78 Medium truck910 Heavy truck1112

Assignment and Skimming Macro

Equilibration Details The model system requires 3-4 global iterations to reach a reasonable level of convergence Assignment and skimming macro is run before each global iteration (to generate LOS for ABM) and after the last iteration (to assign the final results) Assignment and skimming macro requires 4 internal iterations to equilibrate core and non-core components in route type choice Smart schemes are applied w.r.t highway assignment accuracy at early internal iterations and ABM accuracy at early global iterations

EMME Integration Eight databanks stored in the project folder on main machine PsExec copies two banks to each remote worker machine PsExec runs EMME macros remotely PsExec copies the banks back to the main machine Java-based ABM reads skims directly from the databank ABM is run (with sampling) ABM writes demand matrices directly to the databank

Run Times EMME Skimming and Assignment 8 databanks, 4 machines (12 threads each) Module 5.21: 6 hours 1 thread / databank Module 5.22: 1 hour 20 minutes 12 threads / databank CT-RAMP ABM 20% population: 4 hours 100% population: 17 hours Total Run Time for 1 iteration 5 hours 20 minute (with 20% sample) Will be reduced with additional machines (which is planned) 5.22 saves 78% on skimming and assignment time!

Pricing Sensitivity Trips To/From the CBD Scenario: Global pricing, 5X all toll costs

Trips To/From the CBD Scenario: Congestion Pricing, 5X peak toll costs Pricing Sensitivity

Next Steps Additional scenario testing, including corridor specific tests and cordon pricing Demonstrate usefulness of pricing ABM to policymakers Full ABM implementation, including revised transit modeling procedures Improve implementation with: Three additional worker machines Potentially EMME Modeller for data I/O, overall model running, automated creation of inputs, etc

Questions? Matt Stratton, Kermit Wies, Ben Stabler, Peter Vovsha, Surabhi Gupta,