Moving Into Practice
by
JD Hunt, University of Calgary
PROCESSUS Second International Colloquium
Toronto ON, CanadaJune 2005
Overview• Introduction
• Topic: Taking PROCESSUS results into practice
• Motivations• Examples
• Commercial Movement Micro-simulation• Stop Duration Modelling• Growing Tours and Hybrid Tours• PECAS Theoretical Structure
• Conclusions
Introduction
• How PROCESSUS work has moved into practice (PRACTUS?)
• Holy Grail: Theoretical advances that• Have practical implications• Make things easier• Increase fidelity and accuracy
Introduction• Practical interaction important
• Have potential impacts• Directed to specific problems• Scheduling discipline• Funding and data collection• Engineering is Applied Science
Introduction• Practical interaction important -
essential• Have potential impacts• Directed to specific problems• Scheduling discipline• Funding and data collection• Engineering is Applied Science
Examples• Commercial Movement Micro-simulation
Calgary, Ohio, Los Angeles
• Stop Duration ModellingCalgary, Edmonton
• Growing Tours and Hybrid ToursCalgary, Edmonton
• PECAS Theoretical Structure• Integrated and Connected Spatial Economics• Behavioural Space Development
Oregon, Sacramento, Edmonton, Baltimore, Alberta, Ohio
Examples• Commercial Movement Micro-
simulationCalgary, Ohio, Los Angeles
• Stop Duration ModellingCalgary, Edmonton
• Growing Tours and Hybrid ToursCalgary, Edmonton
• PECAS Theoretical Structure• Integrated and Connected Spatial Economics• Behavioural Space Development
Oregon, Sacramento, Edmonton, Baltimore, Alberta, Ohio
Commercial Vehicle Movements
• Vehicles operated for commercial purposes• As opposed to household, personal
movements• Includes ‘non-commercial’ non-household
purposes (government, not-for-profit)• Comprise 10-15% of total urban traffic
Some Examples
Commercial• Hauling freight for
a company• Service workers
visiting clients• Sales meetings• Mail• Delivering parcels
Personal• Travel to work• Travel to school• Shopping• Leisure trips• Social visits
Data
• 2001 Commercial Movement Study • All commercial movements
• Not just freight• Not just trucks
• 3,100 establishments in Calgary• 4,300 establishments in Edmonton• 24 hour stop diary• Firmographics
• Employment structure• Vehicle fleet
Tour-based Micro-simulation
• Considers tours rather than individual trips• Micro-simulation of each tour
Establishment
Client
ClientClient
Client
Establishment
Client
ClientClient
Client
Tour-based Micro-simulation
• Considers tours rather than individual trips• Micro-simulation of each tour• Uses additional information for decisions
• Full-tour conditions• Location of establishment (tour-base)• Work-shift influences• Simulates each trip as tour progresses
• Closer to reality• A number of clients scattered throughout city• Efficient businesses will service them in tours
Micro-simulation Process
Tour Generation
Tour Start
Vehicle and Tour Purpose
Next Stop Purpose
Next Stop Location
Stop Duration
Iterative
Establishment
Client
ClientClient
Client
Lunch
Return toEstablishment
Other
Goods / Service
Stop DurationPrivate Service - Service - Light
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Micro-simulation Process
Start Time
Next Stop Purpose Return
ServiceGoodsOther
Tour Generation
Vehicle and Tour
Next Stop Is AtEstablishment
Location
Next Stop Location
Stop Duration
Micro-simulation Process
Start Time
Next Stop Purpose Return
ServiceGoodsOther
Tour Generation
Vehicle and Tour
Next Stop Is AtEstablishment
Location
Next Stop Location
• Tour starting in zone 340 (Central Industrial) AM Peak
Stop Duration
Micro-simulation Process
Start Time
Next Stop Purpose Return
ServiceGoodsOther
Tour Generation
Vehicle & Tour
Next Stop Is AtEstablishment
Location
Next Stop Location
• Tour starting in zone 340 (Central Industrial) AM Peak
• Light vehicle; service tour
Stop Duration
Micro-simulation Process
Start Time
Next Stop Purpose Return
ServiceGoodsOther
Tour Generation
Vehicle and Tour
Next Stop Is AtEstablishment
Location
Next Stop Location
• Tour starting in zone 340 (Central Industrial) AM Peak
• Light vehicle; service tour
• Current time: 7:22 AM
Stop Duration
Micro-simulation Process
Start Time
Next Stop Purpose Return
ServiceGoodsOther
Tour Generation
Vehicle and Tour
Next Stop Is AtEstablishment
Location
Next Stop Location
• Tour starting in zone 340 (Central Industrial) AM Peak
• Light vehicle; service tour
• Current time: 7:22 AM• Service stop
Stop Duration
Micro-simulation Process
Start Time
Next Stop Purpose Return
ServiceGoodsOther
Tour Generation
Vehicle and Tour
Next Stop Is AtEstablishment
Location
Next Stop Location
• Tour starting in zone 340 (Central Industrial) AM Peak
• Light vehicle; service tour
• Current time: 9:48 AM• Service, 211 (Stampede)
Stop Duration
Micro-simulation Process
Start Time
Next Stop Purpose Return
ServiceGoodsOther
Tour Generation
Vehicle and Tour
Next Stop Is AtEstablishment
Location
Next Stop Location
• Tour starting in zone 340 (Central Industrial) AM Peak
• Light vehicle; service tour
• Current time: 9:48 AM• Service, 211 (Stampede)• Service stopStop Duration
Micro-simulation Process
Start Time
Next Stop Purpose Return
ServiceGoodsOther
Tour Generation
Vehicle and Tour
Next Stop Is AtEstablishment
Location
Next Stop Location
• Tour starting in zone 340 (Central Industrial) AM Peak
• Light vehicle; service tour
• Current time: 11:21 AM• Service, 211 (Stampede)• Service, 209 (Apartment)Stop Duration
Micro-simulation Process
Start Time
Next Stop Purpose Return
ServiceGoodsOther
Tour Generation
Vehicle and Tour
Next Stop Is AtEstablishment
Location
Next Stop Location
• Tour starting in zone 340 (Central Industrial) AM Peak
• Light vehicle; service tour
• Current time: 11:21 AM• Service, 211 (Stampede)• Service, 209 (Apartment)• Other stop
Stop Duration
Micro-simulation Process
Start Time
Next Stop Purpose Return
ServiceGoodsOther
Tour Generation
Vehicle and Tour
Next Stop Is AtEstablishment
Location
Next Stop Location
• Tour starting in zone 340 (Central Industrial) AM Peak
• Light vehicle; service tour
• Current time: 12:13 PM• Service, 211 (Stampede)• Service, 209 (Apartment)• Other, 2205 (Marathon
rest.)
Stop Duration
Micro-simulation Process
Start Time
Next Stop Purpose Return
ServiceGoodsOther
Tour Generation
Vehicle and Tour
Next Stop Is AtEstablishment
Location
Next Stop Location
• Tour starting in zone 340 (Central Industrial) AM Peak
• Light vehicle; service tour
• Current time: 12:13 PM• Service, 211 (Stampede)• Service, 209 (Apartment)• Other, 2205 (Marathon
rest.)• Service stop
Stop Duration
Micro-simulation Process
Start Time
Next Stop Purpose Return
ServiceGoodsOther
Tour Generation
Vehicle and Tour
Next Stop Is AtEstablishment
Location
Next Stop Location
• Tour starting in zone 340 (Central Industrial) AM Peak
• Light vehicle; service tour• Current time: 4:20 PM
• Service, 211 (Stampede)• Service, 209 (Apartment)• Other, 2205 (Marathon rest.)• Service, 2312 (North Hill
Mall)
Stop Duration
Micro-simulation Process
Start Time
Next Stop Purpose Return
ServiceGoodsOther
Tour Generation
Vehicle and Tour
Next Stop Is AtEstablishment
Location
Next Stop Location
• Tour starting in zone 340 (Central Industrial) AM Peak
• Light vehicle; service tour• Current time: 4:20 PM
• Service, 211 (Stampede)• Service, 209 (Apartment)• Other, 2205 (Marathon rest.)• Service, 2312 (North Hill Mall)• Return to establishmentStop Duration
Micro-simulation Process
Start Time
Next Stop Purpose Return
ServiceGoodsOther
Tour Generation
Vehicle and Tour
Next Stop Is AtEstablishment
Location
Next Stop Location
• Tour starting in zone 340 (Central Industrial) AM Peak
• Light vehicle; service tour• Current time:
• Service, 211 (Stampede)• Service, 209 (Apartment)• Other, 2205 (Marathon rest.)• Service, 2312 (North Hill Mall)• Return to establishment, 340Stop Duration
Micro-simulation Process
Start Time
Next Stop Purpose Return
ServiceGoodsOther
Tour Generation
Vehicle and Tour
Next Stop Is AtEstablishment
Location
Next Stop Location
• Tour starting in zone 340 (Central Industrial) AM Peak
• Light vehicle; service tour• Current time:
• Service, 211 (Stampede)• Service, 209 (Apartment)• Other, 2205 (Marathon rest.)• Service, 2312 (North Hill Mall) • Return to establishment, 340
• Tour starting in zone 2604 (NW residential)
Stop Duration
OperationPTM
(EMME/2)
Commercial Movements
Model (micro-simulation)
Updated travel times
Run of model Run of process
Updated commercial
vehicle trip tables
Updated personal trip
tables
Base Information
Re-assignment of trip tables
Model network loading of light vehicle flows
Model network loading of heavy vehicle flows
• less in CBD;• more in
industrial areas• little on non-
truck routes
Results
• Being used for practical policy analysis
• A number of demonstration policy tests considered here
• Five scenarios:• Base case• Increased cost of travel (per km)• Increased travel time• Removed truck route restrictions• Instituted large toll for stops in CBD
VKT proportion of base
85%
90%
95%
100%
105%
Increasedcost
Increasedtime
No truckroutes
Toll Base'
Truck Routes Removed Scenario vs. Base Case
97%
98%
99%
100%
101%
102%
103%
Tours Trips TotalVKT
Truck Routes Removed Scenario vs. Base Case
97%
98%
99%
100%
101%
102%
103%
Tours Trips TotalVKT
LightVKT
MediumVKT
HeavyVKT
Calgary Conclusions
• Tour-based micro-simulation approach used here• Successful• Provides direct representation of trip-chaining
impacts• Includes service delivery• Well beyond ‘freight only’ and ‘large heavy
vehicle’ limitations• Useful planning tool for
• Including commercial movements and their impacts on system
• Assessing impacts of transportation policy and infrastructure development on commercial sectors
Calgary Acknowledgements
• Funding• City of Calgary• City of Edmonton• Province of Alberta• SSHRC - MCRI
• Participation• Kevin Stefan, Karen Tsang• Ali Farhan, Dianne Atkins, Paul McMillan• Alan Brownlee, Bob Ishani, Ian Bakker, John Abraham
Examples• Commercial Movement Micro-simulation
Calgary, Ohio, Los Angeles
• Stop Duration ModellingCalgary, Edmonton
• Growing Tours and Hybrid ToursCalgary, Edmonton
• PECAS Theoretical Structure• Integrated and Connected Spatial
Economics• Behavioural Space Development
Oregon, Sacramento, Edmonton, Baltimore, Alberta, Ohio
P roduction
E xchange
C onsumption
A llocation
S ystem
year t year t+1
region-wideeconomic
activity
activityinteractions
commercial movements
householdtravel
transportnetworks
transport times
and costs
space developmentspace
prices
activity locations and interactions
trip patterns
activity quantities
activity benefits
transport policy
economic trends
economic policy
land use policy
space changes
region-wideeconomic
activity
activityinteractions
commercial movements
householdtravel
transportnetworks
activity locations and interactions
trip patterns
activity quantities
Economic ModelEconomic Model
PECASPECAS
Travel ModelTravel Model
transport impacts
land consumption activity
benefits
$
$ $$$
$ $
$ $$ $
$$$ $ $
$ $ $$
Pro
du
cin
g S
ec
tors
Goods, Services, Labour and SpaceC
on
su
min
g S
ect
ors
$$ $ $
$
$
$ $
$$ $
$
$$$
$
$
Ec
on
om
ic F
low
s
totalconsumption
totalproduction
totalproduction
totalproduction
buying allocationbuying allocationprocessprocess
commodityflows
exchangezone
exchangezone
exchangezone
selling allocationselling allocationprocessprocess
Economic Interactions:Production - Exchange - Consumption
totalconsumption
totalproduction
totalproduction
totalproduction
buying allocationbuying allocationprocessprocess
commodityflows
exchangezone
exchangezone
exchangezone
selling allocationselling allocationprocessprocess
Economic Interactions:Production - Exchange - Consumption
‘Integrated’ and ‘Connected’
composite utility of technology for activity a at an activity location zone z:
Location Specific Utility of Technology
CUTecha,z = ( 1/ p,a ) · ln ( pP exp ( p,a · UTecha,z,p ) )
with:
UTecha,z,p = prod,a· UProda,p,z + cons,a· UConsc,p,z + UTechRefa,p
UConsa,p,z = cC Ra,c,p · r,a,c,p · CUBuyc,a,z
UProda,p,z = cC Ma,c,p · m,a,c,p · CUSellc,a,z
-combines vector of accessibilities into single – SINGLE – ‘composite utility of technology’ value,- each accessibility in vector associated with a given commodity produced or consumed, combination consistent with technology
composite utility of technology for activity a at an activity location zone z:
Location Specific Utility of Technology
CUTecha,z = ( 1/ p,a ) · ln ( pP exp ( p,a · UTecha,z,p ) )
with:
UTecha,z,p = prod,a· UProda,p,z + cons,a· UConsc,p,z + UTechRefa,p
UConsa,p,z = cC Ra,c,p · r,a,c,p · CUBuyc,a,z
UProda,p,z = cC Ma,c,p · m,a,c,p · CUSellc,a,z
-combines vector of accessibilities into single – SINGLE – ‘composite utility of technology’ value,- each accessibility in vector associated with a given commodity produced or consumed, combination consistent with technology
Examples in OregonInitial Model Application
US 97
US 385
New Eastern Oregon Freeway• Land use growth/shift resulting from new freeway
US 97
US 385
New Eastern Oregon Freeway• Land use growth/shift resulting from new freeway
US 97
US 385
New Eastern Oregon Freeway• Land use growth/shift resulting from new freeway
* Medium and high crack density
Local Bridges
State Bridges
Ford’s Bridge
Cole’s Bridge
Sauvie Island Bridge
McKenzie/Willamette River Bridges
Weight Limited BridgeCracked Bridge
Oregon Bridge Options Study• Economic Equity Impacts• Broadened Policy Discussion
Oregon Bridge Options Study
Regional Production Relative to Current Mobility Option
Oregon Bridge Options Study
Resulting Staged Approach
Willamette Valley Forum (Oregon)
Clark Co.WA
Corvallis
Portland Metro
Eugene-Springfield
Salem-Keizer
Albany
<Empty Picture>
Clark Co.WA
Corvallis
Portland Metro
Eugene-Springfield
Salem-Keizer
Albany
<Empty Picture>
Clark Co.WA
Corvallis
Portland Metro
Eugene-Springfield
Salem-Keizer
Albany
<Empty Picture>
Highway Expansion High Speed Transit VMT Tax
Clark Co.WA
Corvallis
Portland Metro
Eugene-Springfield
Salem-Keizer
Albany
<Empty Picture>
Less Land Supply
HH Growth Compared to Reference Case
Many Less Than RC
Same as RC
Many More Than RC
• Compared land use forecasts under various policies• Collaborative visioning
Oregon Acknowledgements
• Funding• State of Oregon• United States Federal Highway Administration
• Participation• John Abraham• Rick Donnelly, Tara Weidner, Christi Willisden,
Jim Hicks, Carl Batten, Pat Costinett, Susan Hendricks, Bill Davidson, Tim Heier, Joel Freedman, Larry Conrad, Tracey Lauritsen, Paul Waddell
• Bill Upton, Brian Gregor
Conclusions
• PROCESSUS is contributing to PRACTICE
• Some theoretical advances with large practical implications• Large infrastructure investments• Some Holy Grails• Investment that pays off in future
• Still too much reliance on choice models• More simple rule-based systems• Faster computations• Emergent behaviour• Role for PROCESSUS
Top Related