tour-based model for a small area
DESCRIPTION
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. The Modern Modeller’s Muddle. Where we are. Where we need to be. Trips. Tours. Further than you think. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Tour-Based Model for a Small Area
Presented at 11th Transportation Planning Applications ConferenceReno, NVMay 2011
William G. Allen, Jr., PEConsultantWindsor, SC
2
The Modern Modeller’s Muddle
Where we are
Where we need to be
Further than Further than you thinkyou think
Trips Tours
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”?
Origini
Destinationj
Stopk
Trip
(Half)-(Half)-TourTour
12
Challenges
Most tour models have been data intensive, costly, and time-consuming
A moving target: research is on-going Typical development: 2 - 3 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 www.williamgallen.com