Transcript Slide 1

Atlanta Travel Forecasting Methods:
Traditional Trip-Based
&
Activity-Based Model
AMPO Travel Modeling Work Group, Nov. 4, 2010
Guy Rousseau, Modeling Manager, Atlanta Regional Commission
ARC Model Applications: Using Radar
Graphs to Visualize Performance Measures
Scenario 1
Scenario 1a
Demand
Accessibility
Demand
Mode Share
Accessibility
Congestion
Mode Share
Congestion
Scenario 2
Scenario 2b
Demand
Demand
Accessibility
Mode Share
Congestion
Accessibility
Mode Share
Congestion
ARC Activity-Based Modeling System
Based on the CT-RAMP1 family of ABMs developed in New York,
NY, Columbus OH (MORPC) and others
- Explicit intra-household interactions
•
- Continuous temporal dimension (Hourly time periods)
- Integration of location, time-of-day, and mode choice models
- Java-based package for AB model implementation
• Implemented with the existing Cube-based networks, GUI and
ancillary models (external model, truck model, assignments, etc)
• Households: 1.7 million in 2005, 2.7 million in 2030
• Model development parallel effort with MTC
1Coordinated
Travel-Regional Activity-Based Modeling Platform
The ARC CT-RAMP Cluster
4 8-processor dual-core Dell servers with 32 GB RAM each
ARC Activtiy-Based Model
Hardware and Software Setup
• Three Windows Server 2003
64bit Machines:
• Two Dual Quad Core Intel
Xeon X570 2.93 GHz
Processors  16 threads
• 32 GB of RAM
• Cube Voyager + 8 seat
Cube Cluster license
• Total cost ~ $30,000 in 2009
ARC Activity-Based Model
Hardware and Software Setup
•
•
•
•
•
64 bit OS for large memory addresses
64 bit Java for CT-RAMP
32 bit Java to integrate with Cube’s native matrix I/O DLL
Cube Base for the GUI
Cube Voyager + Cluster for running
the model, assignment, etc
• Java CT-RAMP software
• 64 bit R for reporting/visualization
ARC’s Activity-Based Model
• Provides results similar to 4-step trip
based model
• Ok, so then why bother with an ABM?
• Because ARC’s ABM provides additional
details, more info about travel patterns &
market segments
• ABM allows to answer questions the 4step model is not capable to provide
• For internal use only, not for official
purposes, hence dual/parallel track of
models
Synthesized Population: Person Age Share
Age 80+
2030
Age 65-79
2005
Age 50-64
Age 35-49
Age 25-34
Age 18-24
Age 16-17
Age 12-15
Age 6-11
Age 0-5
0%
5%
10%
15%
Share
20%
25%
30%
Trip-Based Model Mode Share
Compared to ABM Mode Share
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
HBW
HBO
40%
NHB
30%
20%
10%
0%
WLKL
WLKP
DRVL
DRVP
SOV
Trip-Based Model
HOV
WLKL
WLKP
DRVL
DRVP
Activity-Based Model
SOV
HOV
Line Boardings: Trip Based Model Versus ABM
AM SOV Free:
Trip Length Frequency Distributions
450000
400000
350000
TBM
300000
Frequency
ABM
250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25 27 29
Distance
31
33
35
37
39
41
43
45
47
49
51
VMT by Time Period
80,000,000
70,000,000
60,000,000
VMT
50,000,000
Trip Concept3
40,000,000
ABM Concept 3
30,000,000
20,000,000
10,000,000
0
AM
MD
PM
NT
ARC’s ABM Year 2005 Volume/Count Scatterplot
Line Boardings (Routes > 10,000 Boards)
Station Boardings By Number of Boards
External Model Results
Passenger
Work
Non-Work
Passenger Cars
Truck
Trucks
Trucks
Trucks
TBM
ABM
2030HOV2HOT 2030HOV2HOT
ODRelation
Trips
Trips
IE
390,787
388,150
IE
510,557
507,103
EE
80,219
80,563
II
IE
EE
2,518,171
234,545
25,573
2,518,837
233,478
40,793
What Sort of Performance Measures & Visuals are
Possible with an Activity-Based Model?
ABM results in a complete activity diary for all
ARC residents
•A wealth of activity/travel results
•Just about any custom report/query/visual is
now possible
•Performance Measures also available by
Age, Gender & Household Types
Mean Delay, Peak Period Travel
Travelers By Age
Persons Not At Home By TAZ and Hour
Persons By TAZ and Hour
Conclusions
• Overall, the ARC ABM model appears to be displaying
appropriate sensitivities when compared to the base
year results and the existing trip based model runs.
• Compared with the trip based model run, the ABM
required increased prices in the peak periods in order to
provide 1600 vphpl performance given the significant
amount of toll eligible demand that could use the
facilities
• VMT results by time-of-day suggest that the addition of a
trip time-of-day departure choice model would help
reduce the over predicted night period demand
Potential Improvements
• The population synthesizer works at the
household level. Adding more explicit
functionality for person level information
and controls would be useful.
• The ABM does not have a model to
calculate the departure hour for each trip
within the tour time window. Adding a
model, or simply a distribution of
probabilities by tour purpose and hour,
would be an improvement
Questions / Comments
Guy Rousseau (404 463-3274)
[email protected]
Atlanta Regional Commission
40 Courtland Street, NE
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
www.atlantaregional.com
Acknowledgements: PBS&J, AECOM, Parsons Brinckerhoff,
John Bowman, Mark Bradley, Bill Allen