HomeMy WebLinkAboutRESPONSE - RFP - P856 (28)Converting the North Front Range Model to TransCAD LSA Associates, Inc. Colorado Model Users Group Meeting August 2001 Agenda Conversion User Interfaces Enhancements Applications Model
Conversion Process The converted model from Caliper was not ready to go! The model from Caliper was a basic framework and starting point. Model Replication Mimic the steps and parameters
used in the old model Gives credibility to the TransCAD model and assures everyone of a sound model Learn where the greatest need of update/revision is in the model TransCAD Capabilities
Data can be presented in easy to understand visual presentations Data is easy to verify visually Land use and TAZ data can be combined to produce socioeconomic data Interface with other
city and county functions Geocoding data Model User Interface The dialog boxes that run the whole model Reduce errors by eliminating point/click/type commands GISDK is the key to programming
the model Scenario Manager Created using GISDK Manages all files related to each alternative GIS Developer’s Kit (GISDK) Programmed exactly what we wanted TransCAD to do Allowed for
any method or procedure that was mathematically sound Full customization of dialog boxes The Mason Street model script contained 8,500 lines Model Enhancements Surveys / Data Collection
Socioeconomic Data Networks and Pathbuilding Trip Generation Trip Distribution Mode Analysis Traffic Assignment Performance Reporting Model Enhancements Improve the model to get better
results Change parameters to better utilize technology advancements (iterations, convergence, etc.) Incorporate new theories and procedures Survey Data Survey Data Survey Data Survey
Data Survey Data Modeling Process Networks 1998 Roadway Network Conflation to Actual Distances Local Government Review Peak (congested) and Off-peak Speeds from Floating Car Survey
Socioeconomic Data and TAZ Structure Socioeconomic Data Trip Generation Productions Cross-classified by Household Size and Income New Trip Purposes: HBW HBNW – HBUNIV, HBSHOP, HBOTHER
NHB – WBO, OBO Production Allocation Models: HBUNIV and WBO Trips Special Generators: Non-HBUNIV Trips for University locations and WBO Trips University Production Allocation Trip
Distribution Standard Gravity Model No K-factors! Peak and Off-peak Specificity added Speed Feedback AM Peak Period Congested Speeds Off-Peak Free-flow Speeds Friction Factors –
calibrated curves versus lookup table 1998 Transit Route Structure Bus Stop Detail Bus Speed a function of auto speeds Sensitive to background network Version 3.6: only one stop node
per route node circuity Park and Ride Coding Alternative Modes Mode Split Bike and pedestrian trips – distance based algorithm Non-Fort Collins transit trips Mode Choice Fort Collins
transit trips HBW, HBUNIV – Nested Logit model Others – Binomial Logit model Nested Logit Structure Time of Day Traffic Assignment Supply and Demand Analysis 1998 Screenline Results
1998 Validation Results Performance Reporting Provided consistent and convenient summary reports Created with GISDK Summary Reports The reports are customized using GISDK and summarize
the model data in many ways, including… Facility Type and Area Type Capacity Analysis Congestion Delay Air Quality Emissions Results Air Quality Analysis Link-based emissions Zone-based
emissions (i.e. cold starts, evaporate VOCs, etc.) Air quality conformity determinations Redesignation and classification issues Integration with gridded urban airshed modeling Integration
with Mobile5 GIS-Based Emissions Inventories Post-Mason Opportunities More efficient programming resulting in shorter model run times and smaller file sizes Making the model easier
to use TransCAD 4.0 modeling Development Review Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Traffic Impact Analysis Directional splits for a proposed development Impact of a development on
a specific intersection Routing and Shortest Path Applications Football games Parades Construction closures Fleet management (e.g., snowplows) Hazardous waste Emergency response Intersection
Analysis Synchro Intersection Analysis LSA Associates, Inc. 132 West Mountain Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 970.494.1568 lsa.ftcollins@lsa-assoc.com Customized to the needs of Fort
Collins Analysis tool for troubleshooting model runs Facilitates calibration and validation Link-based emissions Zone-based emissions Gridded Overlay for Region Intersection Flow Diagram
Volumes from TransCAD Actual Traffic Counts NCHRP 255 Process VISSIM 3D Animation SimTraffic 2D Animation End of Friday’s presentation This is a quick introduction to today’s meeting.
Explain that we encourage them to ask questions as they come up and that the schedule is flexible. There has always been a concern about getting future intersection levels of service
from a link based travel demand forecasting model. We are currently working on a process to expedite getting the intersection levels of service into 3d animation. An example of the
Mason Street model scenario manager. All input and output files are chosen with this dialog box. It uses typical Windows file open and file save as dialog boxes to find the correct
files. Since file names can be named in a logical manner, it is easy to find the correct files. EVERETT WILL GIVE ME A NEW SLIDE FOR THIS ONE!! Summary reports allow the data to be
summarized in the same way for each model run. This gives a great comparison tool between several model runs. You can be assured that the reports are summarizing the data in the exact
same way – no place for user error. The ending slide GIS enables the data to be presented at public meetings easily. This greatly aides the public understanding of the modeling results.
GIS makes the data much easier to scrutinize – yielding a much more consistent model. In TransCAD – show model dialog box * Existing Model Initial Model Conversion (Caliper or LSA)
Network Conflation and Model Replication Model Enhancements Calibration / Validation Performance Reporting 1999 Vehicle Intercept Survey Postcards Distributed: Postcards Returned: Completed
Surveys: 61,100 19,600 (32%) 9,300 (15%) Data: O/D Patterns, Trip Purposes, Auto Occupancies 1999 CSU Special Generator Study Daily Person Trips to/from Main Campus Bike Walk Vehicles
Bus Other Total Data: O/D Patterns, Trip Rates, Time-of-day Factors, HBUNIV Trip Purpose Specification, Mode Shares 11,600 18,000 55,000 4,000 1,400 90,000 1999 CSU Special Generator
Study Employee Trips Student/Visitor Trips CSU Main Campus Mode of Travel 1999 Transfort Onboard Transit Survey Fort Collins Transit Trips Home-Work Home-School Home-Shop Other Data:
Mode Choice Modeling 16% 66% 4% 14% 1998 Mobility Report Card Household Survey Data: Trip Rates, Time-of-day Directional Factors, Diurnal Distributions, Trip Purposes 1,100
Households surveyed 11,000 Person Trips All Modes: auto, bus, walk, bike Trip Generation Trip Distribution Mode Analysis Traffic Assignment Socioeconomic Data Roadway Network Transit
Network Transit Ridership Transit Assignment Roadway Volumes Performance Report How many trips? Where will they go? What mode? What route? Identify needs Alternatives analysis Speed
Feedback GIS Networks Roadway System Transit Routes Air Quality Performance Time of Day Volumes Traffic Counts GIS TAZ Structure Area Type 2020 Socioeconomic Data Performance and Air
Quality Area based Indexes Terminal Penalties 1998 Socioeconomic Data Bivariate Distribution Estimated from Fratar Process Using 1990 Census Data TOTAL HIGH From Socio-economic Data
MEDIUM LOW TOTAL 5+ 4 3 2 1 HOUSEHOLD INCOME Distance-based algorithm Choice Drive Access Walk Access Transit Shared Ride Drive Alone 2 Person 3 Person 4+ Person Local Premium Formal
Lot Informal Lot Drive Alone Drive Alone Shared Ride Demand Supply Difference
11-3 SCREENLINES
11-2 VMT jurisdiction
11-1 vmt functional
Expressways
Freeways
Major Arterials
Minor Arterials
Collectors
VMT From Traffic Counts
Percent Difference
Maximum Desirable Error
20-30%
40-50%
30-40%
Fort Collins
Loveland
Greeley
Other/Rural
Region
Screenline
Sum of Model Flows
A
B
C
D
E
F
VMT From Model
Table 48: 1998 VMT Validation by Functional Type
Table 49: 1998 VMT Validation by Jurisdiction
Sum of Traffic Counts
Table 50: 1998 Screenline Analysis
1998 VMT Validation by Jurisdiction
1998 VMT Validation by Functional Type
1998 Screenline Analysis
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
( \ )
44118.00
44356.00
0.00
0.33
108533.00
113022.00
-0.04
0.23
169435.00
157889.00
0.07
0.18
135284.00
126022.00
0.07
0.21
63879.00
39438.00
0.62
0.37
66876.00
76258.00
-0.12
0.27
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
( \ )
789383.00
798014.00
-0.01
783937.00
787304.00
0.00
768244.00
743662.00
0.03
1223651.00
1242626.00
-0.02
3565215.00
3571606.00
0.00
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
( \ )
1086275.00
1004663.00
0.08
0.20
357607.00
347418.00
0.03
0.25
1329824.00
1351020.00
-0.02
646818.00
674122.00
-0.04
144375.00
193451.00
-0.25
11-3 SCREENLINES
11-2 VMT jurisdiction
11-1 vmt functional
Expressways
Freeways
Major Arterials
Minor Arterials
Collectors
VMT From Traffic Counts
Percent Difference
Maximum Desirable Error
20-30%
40-50%
30-40%
Fort Collins
Loveland
Greeley
Other/Rural
Region
Screenline
Sum of Model Flows
A
B
C
D
E
F
VMT From Model
Table 48: 1998 VMT Validation by Functional Type
Table 49: 1998 VMT Validation by Jurisdiction
Sum of Traffic Counts
Table 50: 1998 Screenline Analysis
1998 VMT Validation by Jurisdiction
1998 VMT Validation by Functional Type
1998 Screenline Analysis
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
( \ )
44118.00
44356.00
0.00
0.33
108533.00
113022.00
-0.04
0.23
169435.00
157889.00
0.07
0.18
135284.00
126022.00
0.07
0.21
63879.00
39438.00
0.62
0.37
66876.00
76258.00
-0.12
0.27
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
( \ )
789383.00
798014.00
-0.01
783937.00
787304.00
0.00
768244.00
743662.00
0.03
1223651.00
1242626.00
-0.02
3565215.00
3571606.00
0.00
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
( \ )
1086275.00
1004663.00
0.08
0.20
357607.00
347418.00
0.03
0.25
1329824.00
1351020.00
-0.02
646818.00
674122.00
-0.04
144375.00
193451.00
-0.25
11-3 SCREENLINES
11-2 VMT jurisdiction
11-1 vmt functional
Expressways
Freeways
Major Arterials
Minor Arterials
Collectors
VMT From Traffic Counts
Percent Difference
Maximum Desirable Error
20-30%
40-50%
30-40%
Fort Collins
Loveland
Greeley
Other/Rural
Region
Screenline
Sum of Model Flows
A
B
C
D
E
F
VMT From Model
Table 48: 1998 VMT Validation by Functional Type
Table 49: 1998 VMT Validation by Jurisdiction
Sum of Traffic Counts
Table 50: 1998 Screenline Analysis
1998 VMT Validation by Jurisdiction
1998 VMT Validation by Functional Type
1998 Screenline Analysis
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
( \ )
44118.00
44356.00
0.00
0.33
108533.00
113022.00
-0.04
0.23
169435.00
157889.00
0.07
0.18
135284.00
126022.00
0.07
0.21
63879.00
39438.00
0.62
0.37
66876.00
76258.00
-0.12
0.27
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
( \ )
789383.00
798014.00
-0.01
783937.00
787304.00
0.00
768244.00
743662.00
0.03
1223651.00
1242626.00
-0.02
3565215.00
3571606.00
0.00
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
( \ )
1086275.00
1004663.00
0.08
0.20
357607.00
347418.00
0.03
0.25
1329824.00
1351020.00
-0.02
646818.00
674122.00
-0.04
144375.00
193451.00
-0.25