1 / 16

Model Task Force Data Committee

October 17, 2008. Model Task Force Data Committee. Activity Based Models Review Thomas Rossi Krishnan Viswanathan Cambridge Systematics Inc. Presentation Overview. Study Background and Objectives Models Studied Study Findings Data for Activity Models Discussion.

jenski
Télécharger la présentation

Model Task Force Data Committee

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. October 17, 2008 Model Task Force Data Committee Activity Based Models Review Thomas Rossi Krishnan Viswanathan Cambridge Systematics Inc.

  2. Presentation Overview • Study Background and Objectives • Models Studied • Study Findings • Data for Activity Models • Discussion

  3. Study Background and Objectives • Examine existing activity based models to determine model features, application procedures, and requirements • Determine planning analysis needs for which travel models are used • Summarize the ability of activity based models to provide accurate information for planning analysis needs

  4. Models Studied • Urban Models • San Francisco County, CA (2001) • New York, NY (2002) • Columbus, OH (2005) • Sacramento, CA (2007) • Lake Tahoe, NV/CA (2007) • Atlanta, GA • Portland, OR • Denver, CO • San Francisco Urban Area (MTC), CA

  5. Models Studied • Statewide Models • Ohio Model (2007) • Oregon Model • Research Models • FAMOS (University of South Florida) • CEMDAP (University of Texas) • TASHA (University of Toronto)

  6. Models Studied

  7. Study Findings –Model Structure • Individuals simulated • Model structure • Generate daily activity patterns • Location, time and mode made at two levels : Tour and Trip • Five to eight activity purposes • work, school, shop, meal, social/recreation, and personal business • Some models consider household interactions • Evidence regarding forecasting effectiveness mixed when compared to costs

  8. Study Findings –Model Components • Population Synthesizer • Long Term Choice Models • Auto ownership • Usual workplace location • Daily Activity Pattern Models • Tour Level Models (primary activity) • Trip Level Models (intermediate stops) • Trip Assignment

  9. Study Findings –Model Development Process • Model development between 1.5 to 8 years • Consultants used for model development • Most models used local household activity survey data along with other sources such as transit on-board, external or visitor surveys • Lake Tahoe model was transferred from Columbus

  10. Study Findings –Model Execution • Standard transportation modeling software such as CUBE-Voyager/TP+, TransCAD along with custom programs in C++, Java and Python used • Run times range from 10 hours to 2 days • Distributed computing preferable to reduce runtime • Models need around 7 to 10 GB of storage per run

  11. Study Findings – Policy Planning Analysis • Activity Based Models benefit the following types of analysis • Congestion Management Systems  • Toll Feasibility Studies  • High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lane Studies  • New Starts/Small Starts Analyses • Hurricane Evacuation Modeling Support  • Air Quality Conformity Determinations  • Integrated Land Use Model  • Incorporate Ability to Test Impact of Gasoline Prices 

  12. Study Findings – Data Needs • No special data needs required to develop activity based models beyond what is used for four-step models • Existing household travel surveys can be used to develop data for activity based models • Other data sources such as transit on-board surveys, external and visitor surveys are also vital for activity based models • Census data sources such as PUMS useful for population synthesis • ACS disclosure rules can be problematic

  13. Use of Survey Data in Activity Models Trip-based Approach Activity-based Approach • Number of trips by purpose • Trip-end locations (TAZs) • Trip mode • Time-of-day of Travel • Activities undertaken • Time-of-day of activity/travel episodes • Duration of activity/travel episodes • Locations of activity episodes • Temporal sequencing (Trip chaining / tour formations) • Tour and trip modes • Intra-household interdependencies (task allocation and joint travel/activities – not used in all models) Acknowledgment : Siva Srinivasan, University of Florida

  14. Use of Survey Data in Activity Models • Household and Person characteristics from Household surveys • Age; gender; employment; drivers license • Household size; vehicle ownership; household income; resident type • Zonal data from MPOs/DOTs • Population density; industry employment; land use characteristics • Skim data from model network and MPOs/DOTs • Travel time; fare; distance; transfers

  15. Work Based Subtour Home Based Tour Use of Survey Data in Activity Models Convert Trip data to Tours 8:00 AM 7:30 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 6:30 PM 5:30 PM 6:15 PM 6:00 PM 5:45 PM

  16. Discussion

More Related