1 Florida’s New Transit Modeling System Huiwei Shen, Yongqiang Wu & Dave Schmitt 11 th TRB...
-
Upload
blake-cooper -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of 1 Florida’s New Transit Modeling System Huiwei Shen, Yongqiang Wu & Dave Schmitt 11 th TRB...
1
Florida’s New Florida’s New Transit Modeling Transit Modeling
SystemSystemHuiwei Shen, Yongqiang Wu & Dave Huiwei Shen, Yongqiang Wu & Dave
SchmittSchmitt
1111thth TRB Planning Applications TRB Planning Applications ConferenceConference
Daytona Beach, Florida May Daytona Beach, Florida May 66thth-10-10thth, 2007, 2007
2
Background/ContextBackground/Context
Florida is one of few states that Florida is one of few states that standardizes modeling practicesstandardizes modeling practices
Original standards developed in early Original standards developed in early 1980s1980s
Original transit model needed re-Original transit model needed re-evaluationevaluation Florida MTF decided in 2005 to convert Florida MTF decided in 2005 to convert
models from Tranplan to Voyagermodels from Tranplan to Voyager Increasing pressure on transit models from Increasing pressure on transit models from
New StartsNew Starts
3
Work Task OverviewWork Task Overview
FDOT needed an updated transit FDOT needed an updated transit model using PT that was mindful of model using PT that was mindful of the:the: Existing standardsExisting standards User & planner needsUser & planner needs New/Small Starts & FTA guidanceNew/Small Starts & FTA guidance Features & capabilities of PT & VoyagerFeatures & capabilities of PT & Voyager
Key challenge: PT was largely Key challenge: PT was largely untested & unused at the timeuntested & unused at the time
4
Technical ChallengesTechnical Challenges
Leg vs. linkLeg vs. link
Multi-path path-builderMulti-path path-builder
Always finding a transit pathAlways finding a transit path
5
Leg vs. LinkLeg vs. Link
Centroid
Station
Rail Line
6
Transit Link ExampleTransit Link Example
Centroid
Station
Sidewalk link
Walk-access connector
Sidewalk link
Rail Line
7
Transit Leg ExampleTransit Leg Example
Centroid
Station
Walk-access leg
Rail Line
Two requirements:
• All connectors must connect transit stop to transit stop or transit stop to centroid
• Connectors must ‘spider’ highway network
8
Leg vs. LinkLeg vs. LinkImplicationsImplications
Could not use link-based access connectors Could not use link-based access connectors
Spidering along highway network conflicts Spidering along highway network conflicts with percent walk computations developed with percent walk computations developed in GISin GIS Ubiquitous vs. specific accessUbiquitous vs. specific access
Requires program to coordinate percent Requires program to coordinate percent walks & walk-access connectorswalks & walk-access connectors Lack of any walk-access connectors implies no Lack of any walk-access connectors implies no
real transit access → re-set percent walks to zeroreal transit access → re-set percent walks to zero
9
Technical ChallengesTechnical Challenges
Leg vs. linkLeg vs. link
Multi-path path-builderMulti-path path-builder
Always finding a transit pathAlways finding a transit path
10
Transit Path-BuildersTransit Path-Builders
Two types: single-path & multi-pathTwo types: single-path & multi-path Single-path Single-path
Exclusively available in Tranplan, Exclusively available in Tranplan, Minutp & TP+Minutp & TP+
Dominant path-builder in Florida & USDominant path-builder in Florida & US Multi-pathMulti-path
Available in TransCAD & Cube-Voyager Available in TransCAD & Cube-Voyager (PT)(PT)
Becoming more prevalentBecoming more prevalent
11
Multi-Path vs. Single-Multi-Path vs. Single-PathPath
O D Local Bus
Rail/Shuttle
Express Bus
PathPath Weighted Weighted TimeTime
Single-Single-Path Path Skim Skim
ValuesValues
Multi-Multi-Path Path Skim Skim
ValuesValues
Rail/Rail/ShuttleShuttle 55 min55 min 100%100% 45%45%
Local BusLocal Bus 90 min90 min ---- 20%20%
Express Express BusBus 65 min65 min ---- 35%35%
Also loading
percentages!
12
Multi-Path BuildersMulti-Path Builders AdvantagesAdvantages
Reflect sensitivities that would otherwise:Reflect sensitivities that would otherwise: Be impossible in single-path builders, or Be impossible in single-path builders, or Create inconsistencies between the path-builder & mode Create inconsistencies between the path-builder & mode
choice modelchoice model Offer better consistency between path-builder & mode Offer better consistency between path-builder & mode
choice weightschoice weights UnknownsUnknowns
How to…How to… Design a multi-path model Design a multi-path model Coordinate it with the mode choice modelCoordinate it with the mode choice model Calibrate & validate Calibrate & validate Introduce a new transit modeIntroduce a new transit mode
Whether they meet FTA New/Small Starts guidanceWhether they meet FTA New/Small Starts guidance Whether they work as intended/desiredWhether they work as intended/desired
13
HappeningsHappenings
Citilabs added a best-path ‘switch’ to PT in Citilabs added a best-path ‘switch’ to PT in summer 2006summer 2006 Addresses FTA’s New Starts quality control testsAddresses FTA’s New Starts quality control tests Mimics single-path builder from TranplanMimics single-path builder from Tranplan Not compatible with all parameters/keywordsNot compatible with all parameters/keywords
Initiated testing different model setupsInitiated testing different model setups To provide empirical data to assist with FTA/Citilabs To provide empirical data to assist with FTA/Citilabs
discussionsdiscussions Help determine best design for a PT-based transit Help determine best design for a PT-based transit
modelmodel Identify any software or design-related issues early Identify any software or design-related issues early
onon
14
Transit Model SetupsTransit Model SetupsSetupSetup AccessAccess NetworNetwor
kkPath/Path/
SkimsSkimsMode Mode
ChoiceChoiceAssignmAssignm
entent
PTPT
Multi-Multi-pathpath
PTPT PTPT
PT, path PT, path for each for each access access
mode onlymode only
Access-only:Access-only:
Walk/PNR/ Walk/PNR/ KNRKNR
PTPT
PTPT
Best-pathBest-pathPTPT PTPT
PT, path PT, path for each for each access & access & transit transit mode mode
combinaticombinationon
Access & Access & mode: mode:
Walk/PNR/ Walk/PNR/ KNR by KNR by
bus/project/ bus/project/ fixed-fixed-
guidewayguideway
PTPT
PT-PT-TRNBUILTRNBUILDD
PT, PT, converted converted
to to TRNBUILTRNBUILD within D within modelmodel
PT, PT, converted converted
to to TRNBUILTRNBUILD within D within modelmodel
TRNBUILTRNBUILD, path for D, path for
each each access & access & transit transit mode mode
combinaticombinationon
Access & Access & mode: mode:
Walk/PNR/ Walk/PNR/ KNR by KNR by
bus/project/ bus/project/ fixed-fixed-
guidewayguideway
TRNBUILDTRNBUILD
15
FindingsFindings Developed PT Best-path setup that mimics PT-Developed PT Best-path setup that mimics PT-
TRNBUILD resultsTRNBUILD results Multi-path model design results very different Multi-path model design results very different
from Best-path & TRNBUILDfrom Best-path & TRNBUILD Further research needed to define multi-path Further research needed to define multi-path
model setupmodel setup RecommendationsRecommendations
Short-term – proceeding with PT Best-path setupShort-term – proceeding with PT Best-path setup Separate guidelines for General & New/Small Starts useSeparate guidelines for General & New/Small Starts use
Long-term – track evolving FTA guidance, industry Long-term – track evolving FTA guidance, industry progress & PT updates; goal - evolve to multi-pathprogress & PT updates; goal - evolve to multi-path
16
Technical ChallengesTechnical Challenges
Leg vs. linkLeg vs. link
Multi-path path-builderMulti-path path-builder
Always finding a transit pathAlways finding a transit path
17
Finding a Transit Path Finding a Transit Path
Previous path-builders like Tranplan & Previous path-builders like Tranplan & TRNBUILD would not develop a TRNBUILD would not develop a transit path if walking is fastertransit path if walking is faster Skim would contain all zero’s or just have Skim would contain all zero’s or just have
zero IVTzero IVT No similar logic in PT:No similar logic in PT:
It does not allow the use of consecutive It does not allow the use of consecutive non-transit legsnon-transit legs
If any transit is available, it will always If any transit is available, it will always find a transit path – no matter how find a transit path – no matter how crazy…crazy…
18
Finding a Transit Path Finding a Transit Path ExampleExample
-Take walk connector 137-2909
-Ride all-stop north to 2849
-Take escalator up to 7849
-Ride skip-stop south to 7909
-Take walk connector 7909-136
19
Finding a Transit Path Finding a Transit Path SolutionSolution
Generate “all-walk connectors” from all Generate “all-walk connectors” from all zones to all zoneszones to all zones
Compare all-walk time/utility to transit Compare all-walk time/utility to transit skim/utilityskim/utility If all-walk time is less onerous, zero out transit If all-walk time is less onerous, zero out transit
skimskim
Can be done post skimming or in mode Can be done post skimming or in mode choicechoice
20
StatusStatus
Developed “framework” documents to Developed “framework” documents to summarize key pointssummarize key points Theoretical – coordination of individual partsTheoretical – coordination of individual parts Application – parameter settings, technical Application – parameter settings, technical
detailsdetails Both available on Both available on www.fsutmsonline.netwww.fsutmsonline.net
Developed training model with full Developed training model with full transit modeltransit model
Transit model training workshop: June 4-Transit model training workshop: June 4-7, 20077, 2007
21
Special ThanksSpecial Thanks
James Ryan & Nazrul Islam, FTAJames Ryan & Nazrul Islam, FTA
Wade White & Dudley Morrell, Wade White & Dudley Morrell, CitilabsCitilabs
William Woodford, Jeffrey William Woodford, Jeffrey Bruggeman & Ashutosh Kumar, Bruggeman & Ashutosh Kumar, AECOM ConsultAECOM Consult
22
Thank you!Thank you!