Comparison of Cell, GPS, and Bluetooth Derived External Data Results from the 2014 Tyler, Texas Study 15 th TRB National Transportation Planning Conference.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Update on the Congestion Management Process (CMP) Freight Subcommittee March 11, 2010 Wenjing Pu and Andrew Meese National Capital Region Transportation.
Advertisements

A Synthetic Environment to Evaluate Alternative Trip Distribution Models Xin Ye Wen Cheng Xudong Jia Civil Engineering Department California State Polytechnic.
Surveying and Modeling Long Distance Trips Stacey Bricka, TTI Erik Sabina, DRCOG Catherine Durso, University of Denver Julie Paasche, PTV NuStats Presented.
I-95 Corridor Coalition Vehicle Probe Project 1 The Validation Process I-95 Corridor Coalition Vehicle Probe Project AASHTO SSOM -
Development of a New Commercial Vehicle Travel Model for Triangle Region 14 th TRB Planning Applications Conference, Columbus, Ohio May 7, 2013 Bing Mei.
Subarea Model Development – Integration of Travel Demand across Geographical, Temporal and Modeling Frameworks Naveen Juvva AECOM.
GEOG 111/211A Transportation Planning UTPS (Review from last time) Urban Transportation Planning System –Also known as the Four - Step Process –A methodology.
Opportunities & Challenges Using Passively Collected Data In Travel Demand Modeling 15 th TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference Atlantic.
An Application of Mitigating Flow Bias from Origin/Destination Surveys in a Transit System Jamie Snow (AECOM) David Schmitt (AECOM) May 20, 2015.
Interfacing Regional Model with Statewide Model to Improve Regional Commercial Vehicle Travel Forecasting Bing Mei, P.E. Joe Huegy, AICP Institute for.
To see first hand how the TAZ/TAD development software works Why are we here Today?
Use of Truck GPS Data for Travel Model Improvements Talking Freight Seminar April 21, 2010.
Presented to presented by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Transportation leadership you can trust. Development of a Tour-Based Truck Travel Demand Model using.
GIS Techniques and Algorithms to Automate the Processing of GPS- Derived Travel Survey Data Praprut Songchitruksa, Ph.D., P.E. Mark Ojah Texas A&M Transportation.
COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE. What Smartphone Bicycle GPS Data Can Tell Us About Current Modeling Efforts Katie Kam, The University of Texas at Austin.
Developing Travelshed TAZ Using ArcGIS 15 th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference May 20, 2015 Erich Rentz, RSG Vince Bernardin,
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to presented by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Development of a Truck Model for Memphis 2015 Transportation.
University Travel: The 800 lb. Gorilla in the Room: Treatment of Texas A&M University Kevin Hall (TTI) Dr. Jim Benson (TTI) James Burnett (TxDOT) Greg.
Milton-Madison Bi-State Travel Demand Model Rob Bostrom Planning Application Conference Houston, Texas May 19, 2009.
Development of the Idaho STDM Trip Matrices Using Cell Phone OD Data
New Partners for Smart Growth 11th Annual Conference San Diego February 2, 2012 New Parking Standards for Affordable Housing.
Analysis of Truck Route Choice using Truck-GPS Data
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to presented by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Development of a Hybrid Freight Model from Truck Travel.
COMMUTE Atlanta A Comparison of Geocoding Methodologies for Transportation Planning Applications Jennifer Indech Nelson Dr. Randall Guensler Dr. Hainan.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to presented by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Evaluating and Communicating Model Results: Guidebook for.
Use of Establishment Surveys to Estimate Non Resident Travel in Urban Areas Chris Simek Ed Hard David Pearson Stacey Bricka Stella Nepal Columbus, Ohio.
Developing Travel Models in Rural Areas Based on Actual, Current, Local Data Cy Smith, CEO Sashi Gandavarapu, Data Services Manager AirSage.
Comparison of Cell, GPS, and Bluetooth Derived Travel Data Results from the 2014 Tyler, Texas Study Texas A&M Big Data Workshop February 13, 2015 Ed Hard.
Population Movements from Anonymous Mobile Signaling Data An Alternative or Complement to Large- Scale Episodic Travel Surveys?
Assessment of Urban Transportation Networks by integrating Transportation Planning and Operational Methods /Tools Presentation by: Sabbir Saiyed, P.Eng.
 Presentation at the 15 th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference Atlantic City, NJ Monday, May 18 th Nick Wood, P.E. Texas A&M.
Simpson County Travel Demand Model Mobility Analysis November 7, 2003.
Evaluating GPS Technology Used for Household Surveys Kathy Yu, Arash Mirzaei, Behruz Paschai North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) 15 th.
Estimating Traffic Flow Rate on Freeways from Probe Vehicle Data and Fundamental Diagram Khairul Anuar (PhD Candidate) Dr. Filmon Habtemichael Dr. Mecit.
Validating an Interregional Travel Model: A Case Study in California Nicholas J. Linesch Giovanni Circella Urban Land Use and Transportation Center Institute.
Big Data “Triage” for Long Range Planning Transportation Engineering and Safety Conference Reuben S MacMartin December 12, 2014.
Income-Based Work Trip Stratification within the Puget Sound Regional Council Travel Model Framework 20 th International Emme Users’ Conference Montreal,
Rhett Fussell, PE Craig Gresham, PE No Horsing Around, A Hole in One with Mobile Phone Data Using Mobile Phone Location Data to Support Corridor Analysis.
Ed Hard Stephen Farnsworth David Pearson Methods for Conducting O-D Travel Surveys on High Volume (HV) Facilities 11 th Conference on Transportation Planning.
Behavioral Micro-Simulation 1 Jose Holguin-Veras, Ph.D., P.E. William H. Hart Professor VREF’s Center of Excellence for Sustainable Urban Freight Systems.
CMV Studies: Crash Causation and Safety Belt Use Tapan K. Datta, Ph.D., P.E. Professor Wayne State University Transportation Research Group March 13, 2007.
EFFECTS OF HOUSEHOLD LIFE CYCLE CHANGES ON TRAVEL BEHAVIOR EVIDENCE FROM MICHIGAN STATEWIDE HOUSEHOLD TRAVEL SURVEYS 13th TRB National Transportation Planning.
Summary of Tract-to-Tract Commuter Flows by Type of Geographic Area. A useful way of comparing the general pattern of tract-to-tract commuter flows across.
Assessing the Marginal Cost of Congestion for Vehicle Fleets Using Passive GPS Data Nick Wood, TTI Randall Guensler, Georgia Tech Presented at the 13 th.
Establishment of Freeway Link Volume Validation Targets based on Traffic Count Distributions in the Dallas-Fort Worth Region Behruz Paschai, Arash Mirzaei,
Weighting Household Surveys By David F. Pearson, Ph.D., P.E. April 2007.
Preliminary Evaluation of Cellular Origin- Destination Data as a Basis for Forecasting Non-Resident Travel 15 th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications.
Understanding Cellular-based Travel Data Experience from Phoenix Metropolitan Region Wang Zhang, Maricopa Association of Governments Arun Kuppam (Presenter),
11 th National Planning Applications Conference Topic: Statewide Modeling Validation Measures and Issues Authors: Dave Powers, Anne Reyner, Tom Williams,
Topics Survey data comparisons to “old” model Bluetooth OD data findings Freight model design Q & A.
Best Practices for Collecting Counts and Risk Evaluation for Bicyclists and Pedestrians Krista Nordback, P.E., Ph.D., PSU Taylor Phillips, PSU Mike Sellinger,
CE Urban Transportation Planning and Management Iowa State University Calibration and Adjustment Techniques, Part 1 Source: Calibration and Adjustment.
Emerging Issues for Transportation Data Users of ACS Elaine Murakami, FHWA TRB Planning Applications Conference, April 26,
Reconciliation of regional travel model and passive device tracking data 14 th TRB Planning Applications Conference Leta F. Huntsinger Rick Donnelly.
Preliminary Analysis by: Fawn Hornsby 1, Charles Rogers 2, & Sarah Thornton 3 1,3 North Carolina State University 2 University of Texas at El Paso Client:
Kevin A Henry, Ph.D New Jersey Cancer Registry Cancer Epidemiology Services Frank Boscoe, Ph.D New York State Cancer Registry Estimating the accuracy of.
Applications in Mobile Technology for Travel Data Collection 2012 Border to Border Transportation Conference South Padre Island, Texas November, 13, 2012.
Results and Lessons-Learned from the 2016 Dallas-Ft
Alternate Methodologies for Origin-Destination Data Collection
Developing External and Truck Trips for a Regional Travel Model
Leta F. Huntsinger, PhD, PE Senior Technical Principal, WSP
WIFI Data Collection and the Effectiveness of Various Survey Expansion Techniques- A Case Study on I-95 Corridor in Palm Beach County, FL Presented to.
Presented to 2017 TRB Planning Applications Conference
Steve Farnsworth – Texas Transportation Institute
Johnson City MPO Travel Demand Model
Using Google’s Aggregated and Anonymized Trip Data to Estimate Dynamic Origin-Destination Matrices for San Francisco TRB Applications Conference 2017 Bhargava.
Development of New Supply Models in Maryland Using Big Data
Source: NHI course on Travel Demand Forecasting, Ch. 8 (152054A)
Chattanooga Transportation Data Collection Review
Comparison and Analysis of Big Data for a Regional Freeway Study in Washington State Amanda Deering, DKS Associates.
Presentation transcript:

Comparison of Cell, GPS, and Bluetooth Derived External Data Results from the 2014 Tyler, Texas Study 15 th TRB National Transportation Planning Conference Atlantic City, New Jersey May 20, 2015 Ed Hard Byron Chigoy Praprut Songchitruksa, Ph.D., P.E. Steve Farnsworth Darrell Borchardt, P.E.

Study Area and Overview 2 Tyler MPO, Smith County, Texas Conducted Spring 2014 Focused on: – external trips, E-E, E-I/I-E – average weekday trips  Purpose: To determine if cell and GPS data are viable for use in TxDOT external surveys Trial external travel survey using cell, GPS, Bluetooth (BT) Tyler

Key Study Objectives 3 E-E trips between BT, cell, and third party GPS Commercial/freight E-E trips between BT and GPS E-I/I-E matrices between cell, GPS, and Tyler model Trip length frequency’s (TLFs) between cell, GPS, and Tyler model Study results (where possible) to Tyler’s 2004 external survey results To Compare:

Data Collection/Capture Time Periods 4 Bluetooth - 2 weeks, April 1-April 14 Cell - 4 weeks, March 21-April 24 GPS - 3 months, February 24 – May 9

Study Area Zones and Capture Areas MPO zones aggregated to 307 cell capture zones 18 Exterior cell data capture areas created 10 mile GPS buffer area utilized

Bluetooth Data Collection 6 TTI BT technology and E-E data collection vetted, well tested GPS and Cell E-E results compared against BT E-E BT and class count data collected at 20 external stations Obtained E-E data and percent ‘local’ vs. ‘through’ trips by site

Bluetooth Detection and E-E Matching 7 Over 170,000 BT observations during study period – 24,500 ave. weekday E-E matches – 4,000 per ave. weekday matches with time constraints E-E matches exceeding time constraint removed BT detection ranged from about 4% to 11% Matches expanded and balanced to create E-E matrices

Cell Data Basic Overview 8 198,000 unique resident devices; 17% residential sampling rate Ave. of 180 device sightings per day Device trips considered person trips Data expanded to census tract of device home to account for different penetration rates Data then must be balanced to traffic counts by client

Tyler Area Cell Coverage 9

Cell Data Processing, Analyses 10 Acquired 1 month of data for 325 zones Data review/processing items: – Removing trips that did not cross study boundary – Defining residency For E-E: developed trip matrix, counts by station, percent resident vs non-residents by station For E-I/I-E: developed matrix, trip length frequency distributions (TLFD)

GPS Data Background 11 TTI /INRIX coordinated on – method to process raw GPS data to develop external O-D trips – elements and specifications of data INRIX delivered O-D data files per specs Data delivered in 10- minute increments GPS datasets: freight, cars, apps ‘All vehicle types’ used for most comparisons

GPS Data Processing, Analyses 12 Sampled about 1.6% of traffic stream Extra checks, steps needed to ensure anonymization did not result in misclassification of E-E, E-I, and I-E trip types TTI analyzed files to develop E-E, E-I/I-E trip matrices and count totals by station Data expanded to counts and matrices balanced Same E-E time constraints as used for Bluetooth

External-to-External Results All Vehicles 13

External-to-External Results Non-Commercial Vehicles 14

External-to-External Results Commercial Vehicles 15

E-E Results 16

E-I/I-E Results – Total Trips Saturation/Distribution across Internal TAZs Max Value = 13,500 Max Value = 4,900 Max Value = 3,500 GPS Data 2004 Survey Data Cell Data 17

External-to-Internal Results Trips per Urbanized Acre

Residency by Station Comparison of 2004 Results to 2014 Cell Data 19

E-I/I-E Trip Length All Stations – All Vehicles 20 K-S Test p-value << 0.01

E-I/I-E Trip Length All Stations – Non-Commercial Vehicles 21 K-S Test p-value << 0.01

E-I/I-E Trip Length IH-20 22

General Findings Conclusions E-E 23 TTI - highest comfort level with BT Cell – generally lower than BT and GPS – Questionable trips at periphery between capture zones – Good results for resident vs. non-resident GPS – Higher comfort level with freight E-E – Non-freight will improve as sample size increases – Correlates well with BT results

General Findings Conclusions E-I/I-E 24 Cell – Geographic distribution appears good; some questionable trip ends in rural periphery zones – Lack of positional accuracy impacts smaller urban and rural TAZs GPS – Geographic distribution appears good, though commercial vehicle bias evident – Non-commercial OK but will improve with sample size over time – GPS accuracy impacted by anonymization

General Findings Conclusions Overall 25 Methods/technologies still evolving Combination of technologies and providers best approach for external data (currently) Cell data probably better suited for larger studies areas Third party GPS appears to be viable option – especially as sample sizes increase – more trials needed

Acknowledgments and Special Thanks! 26 Bill Knowles Janie Temple Charlie Hall Bill King Vijay Sivaraman Rick Schuman Andrew Davies

For more Information: Ed Hard (979) Byron Chigoy (512) Praprut Songchitruksa (979) Steve Farnsworth (979) Questions? 27