Tour-Based Model for a Small Area Presented at 11 th Transportation Planning Applications Conference Reno, NV May 2011 William G. Allen, Jr., PE Consultant.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
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,
Advertisements

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.
Regional Bicycle Demand Model: In Use Today in Portland Bill Stein, Metro TRB Transportation Applications Conference Reno, Nevada – May 9, 2011.
GREATER NEW YORK A GREENER Travel Demand Modeling for analysis of Congestion Mitigation policies October 24, 2007.
FOCUS MODEL OVERVIEW CLASS TWO Denver Regional Council of Governments June 30, 2011.
Norman Washington Garrick CE 2710 Spring 2014 Lecture 07
The Current State and Future of the Regional Multi-Modal Travel Demand Forecasting Model.
FOCUS MODEL OVERVIEW CLASS THREE Denver Regional Council of Governments July 7, 2011.
Time of day choice models The “weakest link” in our current methods(?) Change the use of network models… Run static assignments for more periods of the.
What is the Model??? A Primer on Transportation Demand Forecasting Models Shawn Turner Theo Petritsch Keith Lovan Lisa Aultman-Hall.
Status of the SEMCOG E6 Travel Model SEMCOG TMIP Peer Review Panel Meeting December 12, 2011 presented by Liyang Feng, SEMCOG Thomas Rossi, Cambridge Systematics.
SCAG Region Heavy Duty Truck Model Southern California Region Heavy Duty Truck Model.
GEOG 111 & 211A Transportation Planning Traffic Assignment.
Session 11: Model Calibration, Validation, and Reasonableness Checks
CE 2710 Transportation Engineering
GEOG 111/211A Transportation Planning UTPS (Review from last time) Urban Transportation Planning System –Also known as the Four - Step Process –A methodology.
Trip Generation Modeling—Cross-Classification
Norman W. Garrick CTUP. Norman W. Garrick Transportation Forecasting What is it? Transportation Forecasting is used to estimate the number of travelers.
Trip Generation Modeling
A National County-Level Long Distance Travel Model Mike Chaney, AICP Tian Huang, PE, AICP, PTOE Binbin Chen, AICP 15 th TRB National Transportation Planning.
GEOG 111/211A Transportation Planning Trip Distribution Additional suggested reading: Chapter 5 of Ortuzar & Willumsen, third edition November 2004.
FOCUS MODEL OVERVIEW Denver Regional Council of Governments June 24, 2011.
Implementing a Blended Model System to Forecast Transportation and Land Use Changes at Bob Hope Airport 15 th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications.
Modelling Intermediate Stops Presented at 15 th Applications Conference Atlantic CityMay 2015 William G. Allen, Jr., PE Consultant, Windsor, SC Anna Hayes.
FOCUS MODEL OVERVIEW CLASS FIVE Denver Regional Council of Governments July27, 2011.
Source: NHI course on Travel Demand Forecasting (152054A) Session 10 Traffic (Trip) Assignment Trip Generation Trip Distribution Transit Estimation & Mode.
2010 Travel Behavior Inventory Mn/DOT TDMCC- Jonathan Ehrlich October 14, 2010.
BALTIMORE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MODEL ENHANCEMENTS FOR THE RED LINE PROJECT AMPO TRAVEL MODEL WORK GROUP March 20, 2006.
Trip Generation Review and Recommendations 1 presented to MTF Model Advancement Committee presented by Ken Kaltenbach The Corradino Group November 9, 2009.
Transit Estimation and Mode Split CE 451/551 Source: NHI course on Travel Demand Forecasting (152054A) Session 7.
Calculating Transportation System User Benefits: Interface Challenges between EMME/2 and Summit Principle Author: Jennifer John Senior Transportation Planner.
June 15, 2010 For the Missoula Metropolitan Planning Organization Travel Modeling
A New Policy Sensitive Travel Demand Model for Tel Aviv Yoram Shiftan Transportation Research Institute Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering.
Act Now: An Incremental Implementation of an Activity-Based Model System in Puget Sound Presented to: 12th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications.
1 Activity Based Models Review Thomas Rossi Krishnan Viswanathan Cambridge Systematics Inc. Model Task Force Data Committee October 17, 2008.
Utilizing Advanced Practice Methods to Improve Travel Model Resolution and Address Sustainability Bhupendra Patel, Ph.D., Senior Transportation Modeler.
Improvements and Innovations in TDF CE 451/551 Source: NHI course on Travel Demand Forecasting (152054A) Chapter 12.
Travel Demand Forecasting: Trip Distribution CE331 Transportation Engineering.
Comparing a Household Activity-Based Model with a Person Activity-Based Model 14th TRB Conference on Transportation Planning Applications May 5-9, 2013,
Transportation Planning, Transportation Demand Analysis Land Use-Transportation Interaction Transportation Planning Framework Transportation Demand Analysis.
Master’s Thesis Competition Date Monday, 17 th May ‘10.
GABITES PORTER Waikato Regional Transportation Model Grant Smith & Julie Ballantyne.
Income-Based Work Trip Stratification within the Puget Sound Regional Council Travel Model Framework 20 th International Emme Users’ Conference Montreal,
Analysis of Time of Day Models from Various Urban Areas William G. Allen, Jr. Transportation Planning Consultant Windsor, SC TRB Transportation Planning.
February 8, 2008 SERPM65 vs. SERPM6-Corradino 1 SERPM-6.5 & SERPM-6: Differences & Future Directions Southeast Florida FSUTMS Users Group Meeting Ft. Lauderdale,
Evaluating Transportation Impacts of Forecast Demographic Scenarios Using Population Synthesis and Data Simulation Joshua Auld Kouros Mohammadian Taha.
Trends in Complex Travel Presented at 15 th Applications Conference Atlantic CityMay 2015 William G. Allen, Jr., PE Consultant, Windsor, SC.
Presented to Model Task Force Model Advancement Committee presented by Thomas Rossi Krishnan Viswanathan Cambridge Systematics Inc. Date November 24, 2008.
How Does Your Model Measure Up Presented at TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference by Phil Shapiro Frank Spielberg VHB May, 2007.
Comparison of an ABTM and a 4-Step Model as a Tool for Transportation Planning TRB Transportation Planning Application Conference May 8, 2007.
an Iowa State University center SIMPCO Traffic Modeling Workshop Presented by: Iowa Department of Transportation and Center for Transportation Research.
Source: NHI course on Travel Demand Forecasting (152054A) Trip Generation CE 451/551 Grad students … need to discuss “projects” at end of class.
Comparative Analysis of Traffic and Revenue Risks Associated with Priced Facilities 14 th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference.
Source: NHI course on Travel Demand Forecasting (152054A) Session 11: Model Calibration, Validation, and Reasonableness Checks.
SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY Making Activity-Based Travel Demand Models Play Nice With Trip Rates Elizabeth Sall, Daniel Wu, Billy Charlton.
Estimating Volumes for I-95 HOT Lanes in Virginia Prepared for: 2009 Planning Applications Conference Houston, TX May 18, 2009 Prepared by: Kenneth D.
FOCUS MODEL OVERVIEW CLASS FOUR Denver Regional Council of Governments July 7, 2011.
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: Trip Generation CE331 Transportation Engineering.
The Current State-of-the-Practice in Modeling Road Pricing Bruce D. Spear Federal Highway Administration.
A Genetic Algorithm for Truck Model Parameters from Local Truck Count Data Vince Bernardin, Jr, PhD & Lee Klieman, PE, PTOE Bernardin, Lochmueller & Associates,
Responses to Gas Prices in Knoxville, TN Vince Bernardin, Jr., Ph.D. Vince Bernardin, Jr., Ph.D. Bernardin, Lochmueller & Associates Mike Conger, P.E.
Presented to Toll Modeling Panel presented by Krishnan Viswanathan, Cambridge Systematics, Inc.. September 16, 2010 Time of Day in FSUTMS.
Transportation Modeling – Opening the Black Box. Agenda 6:00 - 6:05Welcome by Brant Liebmann 6:05 - 6:10 Introductory Context by Mayor Will Toor and Tracy.
Peter Vovsha, Robert Donnelly, Surabhi Gupta pb
Using Linked Non-Home-Based Trips in Virginia
Transportation Planning Applications Conference Sheldon Harrison
Jim Lam, Caliper Corporation Guoxiong Huang, SCAG Mark Bradley, BB&C
A New Technique for Destination Choice
Presentation transcript:

Tour-Based Model for a Small Area Presented at 11 th Transportation Planning Applications Conference Reno, NV May 2011 William G. Allen, Jr., PE Consultant Windsor, SC

2 The Modern Modeller’s Muddle Where we are Where we need to be Further than you think TripsTours

3 Glynn County, Georgia Southeast Georgia coast, between Savannah and Jacksonville County seat: Brunswick 2006: 67,600 people, 36,600 jobs Home to St. Simons Island, Jekyll Island, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Bisected by I-95

4 Glynn County Location

5 Why a New Travel Model? Georgia DOT already has a travel model -- the official MPO model County was growing rapidly GDOT not always able to respond quickly County wanted more detail, more focus on local roads and small areas County wanted to control the process

6 Where to Start? Buy the software (Cube Voyager, the GDOT standard) Software is a platform, not a model Using a model is easy, creating one requires specialized expertise County hired a consultant to develop the model and train staff

7 Observed Travel Data Home interview survey is best – Expensive ($200/household) – Difficult, time-consuming – Add-on to NHTS (next one: 2017) 2000 Census has some data on Work travel GDOT has traffic counts Validation year: 2006 (before gas price spike, recession)

8 Glynn County Approach Very limited budget and schedule Subdivide the GDOT TAZes and add network detail GDOT: 397 zones, County: 676 Transfer model from other cities, adjust to reflect local conditions & counts Copy some information from GDOT model

9 Conventional Travel Modelling “Four step process”: generation, distribution, mode choice, assignment Travel is zone-to-zone aggregate totals Trips are independent of each other Used for over 50 years

10 The New Way Model every individual trip Measure travel in round-trip tours More realistic representation of travel Faster computers make calculations feasible – More accuracy and flexibility possible Favored by academics and researchers – More theoretically correct Slowly becoming adopted

11 What Is a “Tour”? Origin i Destination j Stop k Trip (Half)-Tour

12 Challenges Most tour models have been data intensive, costly, and time-consuming A moving target: research is on-going Typical development: years, $ millions Often custom-written software (black box) Model run times measured in days New York, Columbus, Sacramento, Atlanta

13 Simplified Version County staff expressed no preference Limited resources – 6 months, $60K, no survey data – Not a research project, need real results Not a true activity-based model No transit Doesn’t model personal interactions, household relationships, or trip sequencing

14 Some Things Are the Same Still must represent the basic choices: – How many trips? – Where? – By what mode? – At what time? – By what route? Sequence of steps is not much different Most components are familiar

15 Some Things Are Different Travel represented as round-trip tours Model discrete travel by HHs, not zonal averages Use Monte Carlo simulation to model individual travel choices Added simple time of day model (4 periods) New intermediate stop model – How many stops? – Where?

16 Model Synthesis Use Baltimore 2001 NHTS add-on survey Port, manufacturing, tourism, I-95 – it’s Brunswick on a larger scale Provided many parameters, relationships Adjust for geographic scale Borrowed some parameters from GDOT model Validated to 2000 JTW & local counts

17 Generation Starts conventionally Purposes: HBW, SCH, HBS, HBO, COM, TRK, ATW, VIS, 4 I/E’s, 4 E/I’s Prods: look-up table by size & income Attrs: regression by zone Rates from GDOT and Baltimore models Non-motorized share removed Output a record for each RT tour

18 Distribution Allocate productions to zone of tour attraction – HBW, SCH: work or school – Other: where you spent the most time Discrete destination choice Probabilities calculated by gravity function F’s based on 2000 JTW; non-work by analogy Process iterated to match attractions

19 Intermediate Stops Each journey is a round-trip tour Main tour purposes: work, school, shop, other, at-work, visitor Stops are made on the way from home and on the way back home 30% of tours involve at least 1 stop Stops are for shopping, personal business No Non-Home-Based trip purpose!

20 Two Sub-Models Two multinomial logit models Model 1: How many stops? (separately by P-A and A-P) – Based on tour purpose, HH size, income, area types, retail emp, P-A travel time – A-P stops also based on number of P-A stops Model 2: Where are the stops? – Logit destination choice – Detour time, area type, employment

21 Other Models Time of Day: fixed percents by purpose used to allocate half-tours to 4 time periods Mode Choice: standard logit auto occupancy model: 1, 2, 3, 4+ per auto Trip Accumulator: splits RT tours into individual O/D trips by SOV / HOV / TRK and period Conventional assignment by period, veh type One speed feedback loop

22 Uses of New Model Evaluate growth proposals Support impact fees Long-range plan analysis Provide data to site traffic studies Corridor studies

23 So What? Runs in 1 hour on any Windows computer No black box software; all in Cube Voyager Easy to run; requires few inputs Accuracy was improved (10% RMSE) Incorporated the key features of tour-based models Proof that new approach can be applied to a smaller area, on a budget (6 months, $60 K)

24 Questions? Presentation is available at