Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to ITS Georgia presented by Richard Margiotta, Principal Cambridge Systematics, Inc. October 5, 2009.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Innovative Tools October 27, 2011 Chi Mai. 2 Presentation Overview VISSIM Corridors VISSIM Protocol Hours of Congestion.
Advertisements

Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to ITS Georgia 2005 Annual Meeting presented by Kenny Voorhies Cambridge Systematics, Inc. August 29,
Statewide Mobility Performance Measures Team Meeting Webinar June 17, 2013.
Getting Started with Congestion Pricing A Workshop for Local Partners Federal Highway Administration Office of Operations.
Traffic Incident Management Driving Cooperation and Coordination in the U.S. Tim Lane, Chief of Enforcement Az Department of Transportation Enforcement.
Travel Time Reliability Measures Shawn Turner Texas Transportation Institute NTOC Web Cast: Travel Time Reliability June 28, 2006.
Management and Operations In MPO Planning Christopher O’Neill.
2015/6/161 Traffic Flow Theory 2. Traffic Stream Characteristics.
Archived Data User Services (ADUS). ITS Produce Data The (sensor) data are used for to help take transportation management actions –Traffic control systems.
CEE 320 Fall 2008 Queuing CEE 320 Anne Goodchild.
Congestion Reduction Using Intelligent Transportation Systems Ben Sperry University of Evansville University of Evansville MESCON March 25, 2006.
Jeffrey F. Paniati Associate Administrator for Operations Federal Highway Administration Department of Transportation Enabling Congestion Pricing in the.
Norman W. Garrick Travel Flow Data Some Basic Concepts Good travel flow data for all modes of travel is important for transportation planning and design.
Operations Planning Organizing for Travel Time Reliability Ohio Planning Conference July 15, 2014.
Design Speed and Design Traffic Concepts
Traffic Incident Management – a Strategic Focus Inspector Peter Baird National Adviser: Policy and Legislation: Road Policing.
ICM Minnesota – Interstate 394 Brian Kary, Minnesota Department of Transportation.
1 Segment Level Analysis of Travel Time Reliability Meead Saberi K., Portland State University I-5 SB, San Diego, CA.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to Talking Operations Webinar presented by Richard Margiotta Cambridge Systematics, Inc. June 28, 2006.
Evaluating Robustness of Signal Timings for Conditions of Varying Traffic Flows 2013 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium – August 16, 2013.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to Talking Freight Seminar presented by Richard Margiotta Cambridge Systematics, Inc. September 21,
Beyond Gee-Whiz Statistics: Guiding Transportation Investments with Transportation System Performance Measures presented by Richard Margiotta, Principal.
Forecasting Travel Time Index using a Travel Demand Model to Measure Plan Performance Thomas Williams, AICP Texas A&M Transportation Institute 2015 TRB.
Incorporating Management and Operations and the Congestion Management Process into Metropolitan Transportation Planning FHWA/FTA Webinar June 24, 2008.
Fast Forward Full Speed Ahead Presented at the Joint ITS Georgia / Tennessee Annual Meeting September 25, 2006 by Carla W. Holmes, P.E., PTOE Georgia Department.
TSM&O FLORIDA’S STATEWIDE IMPLEMENTATION Elizabeth Birriel, PEElizabeth Birriel, PE Florida Department of TransportationFlorida Department of TransportationTranspo2012.
University of Minnesota FUSING PUBLIC AND PRIVATE TRUCK DATA TO SUPPORT REGIONAL FREIGHT PLANNING AND MODELING Chen-Fu Liao Minnesota Traffic Observatory.
1 Modeling Active Traffic Management for the I-80 Integrated Corridor Mobility (ICM) Project Terry Klim, P.E. Kevin Fehon, P.E. DKS Associates D.
Simpson County Travel Demand Model Mobility Analysis November 7, 2003.
Incident Management in Central Arkansas: Current Settings and Proposed Extensions Weihua Xiao Yupo Chan University of Arkansas at Little Rock.
Multimodal Corridor System Management – Incorporating Analysis of Transit, Demand Management Programs and Operational Strategies Presented by Bill Loudon,
Quantifying Transportation Needs and Assessing Revenue Options: The Texas Experience presented to The Arkansas Blue Ribbon Committee on Highway Finance.
Congestion Causes and Solutions. Traffic Congestion Characteristics Slower speeds Longer trip time Increased queues More vehicles.
I-394 MnPASS Technical Evaluation Preliminary Findings March 23, 2006 Doug Sallman – Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
I-394 MnPASS Technical Evaluation Doug Sallman – Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to FHWA “Talking Freight” Seminar Series presented by Lance Neumann Cambridge Systematics, Inc. August.
California Department of Transportation Transportation Management Systems (TMS) and their role in addressing congestion Discussion Materials Lake Arrowhead.
TRB Transportation Applications Conference Congestion-Free Freeways US Department of Transportation Establishing a Metropolitan.
Interpreting Demand and Capacity for Street and Highway Design Lecture 6 CE 5720 Norman Garrick Norman W. Garrick.
Major Transportation Corridor Studies Using an EMME/2 Travel Demand Forecasting Model: The Trans-Lake Washington Study Carlos Espindola, Youssef Dehghani.
Managing Travel for Planned Special Events: What, Why, & Benefits Walt Dunn, P.E. Dunn Engineering Associates, P.C. Talking Operations Seminar January.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to Safety Data Analysis Tools Workshop presented by Krista Jeannotte Cambridge Systematics, Inc. March.
AASHTO SCOTE Annual Meeting 2011 Dr. Nick Compin Caltrans Office of Systems Management Planning Performance Measurement and Traffic Data Branch Ph: (916)
Strategic Highway Research Program 2 Project L07 Identification and Evaluation of the Cost- Effectiveness of Highway Design Features to Reduce Nonrecurrent.
New Uses for Archived Data Cathy McGhee, PE Senior Research Scientist Brian L. Smith, Ph.D. Associate Professor ITS America Annual Meeting May 2, 2005.
1 Using Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Technologies and Strategies to Better Manage Congestion Jeffrey F. Paniati Associate Administrator of.
Robert Brydia Project Lead, I-35 Traveler Information During Construction Texas A&M Transportation Institute WORK ZONES & LARGE TRUCKS THE CENTRAL TEXAS.
1 Congestion Measurement Mark Hallenbeck TRAC. 2 Historical Use of volume data –AADT –AWDT, –Hourly volumes To estimate delays Can produce a reasonable.
AASHTO Standing Committee on Performance Management SURFACE TRANSPORTATION AUTHORIZATION Task Force - System Operations: Francis Ziegler, North Dakota,
Review of the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) 2007 Urban Mobility Report By Ronald F. Kirby Daivamani Sivasailam TPB Technical Committee October 5,
ITS America Annual Meeting Session 38 Managing and Operating the Transportation System Christine M. Johnson.
Problem 4: Clifton Country Rd/Route 146 Intersection Base Case Phasing and Volumes Analysis Plans Description of Analyses Overarching Issues 4a: AM peak.
Influencing Travel Behaviour Graham Riley Regional Programme Manager North of England Slide 1.
SHRP2 Project C05: Final Report to TCC Understanding the Contribution of Operations, Technology, and Design to Meeting Highway Capacity Needs Wayne Kittelson.
Review of the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) 2007 Urban Mobility Report By Ronald F. Kirby Presentation to Transportation Planning Board October.
A case–driven comparison of Freeway Performance Measurement Systems by Shailesh Deshpande.
TRAVEL TIME ANALYSIS Use of Data IN-KY-OH Traffic Incident Management Conference October 9, 2015 Dayton, OH.
Chapter 9 Capacity and Level of Service for Highway Segments
2007 Urban Mobility Report Principal Speaking Points.
2015 Urban Mobility Scorecard Tim Lomax Texas A&M Transportation Institute Austin Chamber of Commerce December 2015.
Transportation Systems Management and Operations: Technology Solutions and Active Management Presenter Name Date AGENCY LOGO Photo: © Shutterstock.com/iofoto.
Do Mobility-Based Performance Measures Reflect Emissions Trends? Congestion and Emissions Co-performance Alex Bigazzi & Dr. Miguel Figliozzi ITE Western.
SHRP2 C05: Understanding the Contributions of Operations, Technology, and Design to Meeting Highway Capacity Needs Freeway Data Freeway data has been collected.
ATDM Analytical Methods for Urban Streets Urban Streets Subcommittee Meeting January 10, 2016 David Hale.
Case Study 4 New York State Alternate Route 7 Problem 2.
Case Study 4 New York State Alternate Route 7 Problem 4
Presented to 2017 TRB Planning Applications Conference
Ventura County Traffic Model (VCTM) VCTC Update
MODULE 2: TSMO Strategies
MODULE 2: TSMO Strategies
Presentation transcript:

Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to ITS Georgia presented by Richard Margiotta, Principal Cambridge Systematics, Inc. October 5, 2009 Developing and Predicting Travel Time Reliability

1 Overview Defining reliability Measuring reliability Predicting reliability Tie this to the current SHRP 2 Project L03: Analytic Procedures for Determining the Impacts of Reliability Improvement Strategies

2 What is Travel Time Reliability? Definition: A consistency or dependability in travel times, as measured from day to day and/or within different times of day Travelers on familiar routes learn to “expect the unexpected” Their experience will vary from day-to-day for the same trip Reliability “happens” over a long period of time Need a history of travel times that capture all the things that make them variable

3 Averages don’t tell the full story Jan.Dec.July Travel time How traffic conditions have been communicated Annual average Jan.Dec.July Travel time What travelers experience Travel times vary greatly day-to-day What they remember

4 Communicating the Benefits of Improvements When Mn/DOT’s ramp meters were turned off ( “before period”) in 2000: 22-percent increase in average travel times 91-percent decline in travel time reliability Travel time Before After Avg. day Small improvement in average travel times Larger improvement in travel time reliability Reliab. Before After Worst day of month

5 Reliability has costs! Variability in travel times means that extra time must be planned for In other words, travelers have to leave earlier – they build in a BUFFER to their trip planning, or suffer the consequences These extra costs have not been accounted for in traditional economic analyses of transportation improvements

6 Reliability has costs (cont.) Planned extra time at least as costly as regular travel time Some studies place the Buffer’s costs at 1-6 times higher than average travel time Some trips will still exceed the Buffer – late penalties Some trips will take much less than the Buffer – early arrival penalties Reliability (or the lack of it) just says that travel times are inconsistent/variable – it doesn’t tell you why!

Measuring Reliability

8 A Model of Congestion and Its Sources n = Source of Congestion Base Delay (“Recurring” or “Bottleneck”) Physical Capacity …interacts with… Demand Volume 4 Event-Related Delay Total Congestion Daily/Seasonal Variation Special Events Planned …determine… Emergencies 231 …lowers capacity and changes demand… Traffic Control Devices Roadway Events Weather Incidents Work Zones …can cause…

9 SHRP 2 Project L03: The Data Challenge Reliability is defined by a long history – at least a year – of travel times (a distribution) Implies that automated equipment is the only feasible method of data collection, but... Automated equipment not deployed everywhere So, how can enough empirical data be collected to study the effect on reliability? Tap existing data sources as much as possible Supplement with data purchased from private vendors Rely on a cross-sectional predictive model

10 Analysis Data Set Traffic Data Incident Data Weather Data Incident Management Geometric Characteristics Volumes Speeds Demand Traffic Statistics By Time Slice Section Reliability Measures Section Traffic Characteristics Agency Generated Traffic.com NWS Hourly Obs Service PatrolsService Patrols PoliciesPolicies CapacityCapacity BottleneckBottleneck Ramp MetersRamp Meters Analysis Data Set

11 I-405 Northbound, Seattle, 4-7 P.M. Buffer Index = 0.19 Skew Statistic = 2.02 Planning =1.39 Time Index Misery Index = 1.48

12

13

14 Travel Time History: D.C. to GW Bridge

15 Travel Time History: Richmond to Philadelphia

16 Influence of Trip Start Time: Test Trip #1

17 D.C. to GW Bridge Thanksgiving Holiday Travel

18 Trends in Reliability: Atlanta Study Sections All Sections Travel Time Index Average Travel Time th Percentile Travel Time Buffer Index th Percentile Travel Time Skew Statistic VMT Change +0.6%-2.1%

Predicting Reliability

20 Project L03 Before/After Studies Urban freeway study sections revealed 17 before/after conditions: Ramp meters – 4 Freeway service patrol implementation – 2 Bottleneck improvement – 3 General capacity increases – 5 Aggressive incident clearance program – 2 HOT lane addition – 1

21 SR-520 Ramp Metering Peak Period: 6:00 – 9:00 Seattle, WA BeforeAfter % Change Reliability Metrics Travel Time Index ,2% Buffer Index % Planning Time Index % Other locations show similar reports (5-11% reduction in PTI)

22 Capacity Addition: Peak Period Comparison I-405: add 1 GP lane to 2 existing GP + 1 HOV lanes Travel Time Buffer Planning Period Index Index Time Index Before (2007) % 3.4 After (2009) % 2.2 (-42.3%) (-35.2%) I-94: add 1 GP lane to 2 existing Travel Time Buffer Planning Period Index Index Time Index Before (2001) % 2.4 After (2005) % 1.4 (-31.2%) (-41.7%)

23

24 Statistical Modeling Results show that all reliability measures defined in the study can be predicted as a function of average Travel Time Index Allows reliability prediction from a wide variety of other methods/models that predict the average TTI Except that our TTI includes the effect of all sources; models predict recurring-only Analysis shows Overall TTI is 15-20% > Recurring Only TTI

25 Statistical Modeling (cont.) Both average and 95 th %ile TTI can be predicted as a function of: “Critical” demand-to-capacity ratio −Most significant factor −Highest d/c ratio of individual segments on the section Incident lane-hours lost (minimal work zones in data) Hours where rainfall >= 0.05” RMSEs ~ 20%

26 Congestion by Source: A Simple Analysis with Atlanta Data (peak period) Identified days where incidents and precipitation occurred Recurring only……………………….. 47% Incident……………………………….. 35% Precipitation…………………………. 10% Incident + Precipitation……………. 8%

27 A More In-depth Look at Congestion by Source: Seattle Preliminary Findings Volume is the primary factor in congestion and the effect of any given type of disruption Congestion only forms when disruption is big enough to reduce capacity below demand Once congestion forms in the peak period, the effects linger until the end of the peak period Disruptions in the leading shoulder of a peak have larger/longer effects than those in the peak or trailing shoulder

28 Probability of Being in Congestion: Rain Versus No Rain I-90 Westbound From Issaquah to Bellevue

29 Comparison of Mean Travel Times With and Without the Influence of Incidents. I-5 Northbound Through the Seattle Central Business District

30 Percentage of Delay By Type of Disruption Influencing That Congestion : Seattle

31 Implications of Project L03 Findings Volume (demand) is a major determinant of reliability and total congestion Determine base congestion and how severe events will be Volume can be used to determine when / where incident response vehicles are deployed Demand management strategies are a major reliability mitigation strategy Early AM benefits are lower than late midday benefits Problems in midday can cause big evening congestion From a congestion relief perspective, this suggests more emphasis on middle of day less emphasis early and late