1 / 21

Turnpike Enterprise Use of TeleAtlas GIS Data for Transportation Modeling

Turnpike Enterprise Use of TeleAtlas GIS Data for Transportation Modeling. presented to GIS Committee presented by Eric Songer, URS Corporation 11/20/2008. Agenda. Context What we did What we are doing Where we believe we should go Discussion. Context. “Data Driven” Approach

makers
Télécharger la présentation

Turnpike Enterprise Use of TeleAtlas GIS Data for Transportation Modeling

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. Turnpike Enterprise Use of TeleAtlas GIS Data for Transportation Modeling presented toGIS Committee presented byEric Songer, URS Corporation 11/20/2008

  2. Agenda • Context • What we did • What we are doing • Where we believe we should go • Discussion

  3. Context • “Data Driven” Approach • GIS database is key • Start with best available data • Refine and constantly correct data • Modelers and GIS Analysts work closely • Hand off point is fluid • Modelers use ArcGIS to edit database

  4. TeleAtlas Data for Transportation Modeling What We Did • Turnpike State Model • TeleAtlas “features” • Spatial/Geometry Issues • Attribute Issues

  5. Turnpike State Model • Statewide • County Building Blocks • Used shapefiles from TeleAtlas • Duplicate arcs removed • Chaining of arcs done in Fennessy’s software

  6. TeleAtlas “Features” • Duplicate arcs to represent multiple names • County basis has duplicate arcs between counties • Attribute fields not needed for modeling • Attributes needed for modeling • Unique ID field Dynamap_ID

  7. Spatial Geometry Issues • Duplicate arcs cause headaches • Geometry links up in 3 dimensions • Does not contain every road • Does not contain future roads

  8. Attribute Issues • Occasional errors (don’t assume they’re correct) • FZLEV or TZLEV = -9 are duplicate arcs • Does not have capacity, counts, and network identification • Has address and labeling information

  9. Lessons Learned • Separate county files are logistic problem • Never missed duplicate arcs or discarded fields • Need to have capability to “Check in” numerous editors versions • Maintenance, Maintenance, Maintenance… • Can’t rely on anybody’s data “as is” or you will be wrong • Modelers can edit in ArcGIS with little training

  10. TeleAtlas Data for Transportation Modeling What We Are Currently Doing • Context • Versioned ESRI geodatabase • Model runs are snapshots of database

  11. Context • Regional Models (Lee-Collier, Central Florida) • Continual refinement of all processes • Lee-Collier complete • Central Florida being built

  12. Versioned ESRI Geodatabase • Personal ArcSDE (SQL Server Express) • Editors get Personal GDB (Access based) • Checked in by data administrator • No longer separate county files

  13. Model Run Snapshots • Shapefile is exported for input to model • Separate shapefiles for Existing and Future conditions • Shapefile and associated model files can be archived

  14. Lessons Learned • Tradeoff between speed and duplication • The Devil is in the details • You are never done • It can always be better

  15. TeleAtlas Data for Transportation Modeling Where we are going • Routine Maintenance of Data • Regular Updates of TeleAtlas • Transaction File • Many small updates • True Geodatabase or Route System Basis • Finished Models are Archived as Snapshots/Versions

  16. Regular Maintenance • Get quarterly updates as Transaction Files • Automate update where appropriate • Expect we will always need to manually fix some areas

  17. True Geodatabase • Believe a cascading update structure can be built • Better way to store data • Spatial views • Versioning

  18. Archiving • Multiple dimensions to problem of archiving • Not only documentation • Need to be able to resurrect that model for future work

  19. Food for Thought • Arcs must be “Chained” • Doesn’t need to be done in model software • Data Driven and Model Centric approaches both have tradeoffs • Data side is constantly being updated by third party

  20. Questions ? Eric Songer 850-402-6327 eric_songer@urscorp.com

More Related