Ohio Statewide Travel Model:Framework, Freight, and Initial Calibration: Ohio Statewide Travel Model: Framework, Freight, and Initial Calibration 11th National Transportation Planning Applications Conference May 6-10, 2007, Daytona Beach, Florida Session 6:
Acknowledgements: Acknowledgements This presentation was primarily developed by Pat Costinett.
Topics: Topics Ohio Statewide Modeling Framework
Micro-simulation
Integrates:
Economic
Land use
Transport Models
Aggregate Commercial Model (ACOM)
Preliminary calibration results
General Model Structure: General Model Structure Integrated micro-simulation based
Model economic activity & land use
Build synthetic population
Tour-based
Home tours
Establishment/Work tours
Aggregate commodity movements
Model Components & Flows: Model Components & Flows
Model Components & Flows: Model Components & Flows Economic Activity by
Geography
ISAM: ISAM Input-output economic model
Represents trading commodities
Exogenous to the model system
Slide8: 1 = Model Area
ISAM: ISAM Input-output economic model
Represents trading commodities
Exogenous to the model system
Region to region commodity flows
Shares of commodity flows from the model area to regions
Economic Activity & Land Development: Economic Activity & Land Development Approximately 700 districts and 4000 zones
Distribution of economic activities & flows by sector to analysis districts
Production of goods & services by zone
Consumption demand for goods & services by zone
Flows of commodities (goods, services & labor) among zones
In response to exchange prices
Interacting with a grid-based representation of land supply, develop types, zoning, water & sewer service, flood plains, steep slopes, other protected land uses and land prices
Economic Activity & Land Development: Economic Activity & Land Development Results:
Flows of commodities between districts
Floor space allocated to activities by zone
Model Components & Flows: Model Components & Flows Synthetic Population
Model Components & Flows: Model Components & Flows Transport Models
Types of Trip Making Modeled: Types of Trip Making Modeled Personal Travel /Household Travel (PT):
person movements arising from household (or population) production and consumption,
separated into short distance (50 mi or less) and long distance
Visitor Travel (VM):
person movements made by non-residents staying at locations in the internal model area
Business/Services Travel (DCOM):
movements arising as part of the rest of the ‘business cycle’ apart from the physical delivery of commodities
Goods Transport (ACOM):
shipments of commodities arising from economic activity production and consumption
Short Distance Tours (SDT): Short Distance Tours (SDT) Weekday travel behavior of persons for all purposes: work & school, shopping, recreation, other
Based on large sample of one-day travel diary data of urban and rural households in the model area (~15000 households)
Higher decision models are informed by lower level accessibility measures
Model components include:
Work place location
Household auto ownership
Full day activity pattern choice
Primary activity location choice
Primary activity schedule choice
Tour mode choice
Intermediate stop location and arrival/departure time choices
Trip mode choice
Work-based sub-tours activity duration and location choice
Long-Distance Tours (LDT): Long-Distance Tours (LDT) Infrequent occurrence but important element of statewide/intercity travel demand
Omitted from conventional models
Household survey of long-distance travel
Two-week retrospective survey of 6000 households
Four week prospective survey of 2000 households
Survey-based model derivation incorporating full micro-simulation of households & persons
Model components include:
Choice to make a LDT or not, whole household tour, individual business tour or individual other tour
Tour pattern choice, depart, arrive, round trip, away on travel day
Time-of-day tour scheduling
Primary destination choice
Intermediate stop frequency and destination choice
Mode choice
Commercial Travel: Commercial Travel Incorporates long-haul commodity shipment, localized goods delivery, service provision & work-related tours
Long-haul shipment related directly to commodity flows
Establishment survey of goods delivery, service provision & work-related tours
Micro-simulation of commercial tours for each employee (a first at this scale)
Why a freight model?: Why a freight model? Need to be consistent with economic models
Freight movements are important to Ohio:
Interest in impact of Turnpike tolls on trucks.
Interest in road-rail diversion.
Relatively large impact on traffic LOS
Underlying “Theory”: Underlying “Theory” Commodities are carried by trucks, rail, and other modes
Commodity flow patterns determine truck flow patterns
Truck characteristics vary substantially by commodity type and shipment distance
Mode share
Average value per ton
Size mix
Average payload weight
Unlike personal travel, commodity shipment choices are influenced very little by network LOS measures
What does it do?: What does it do? ACOM translates dollar flows of commodities from ISAM and AA into truck trips by four size categories
ISAM for E-E
AA for I-I
Both for E-I and I-E
ACOM and Economic Models Relationships: ACOM and Economic Models Relationships Internal to Internal External to Internal External to
External Internal to
External ISAM AA AA ISAM
What does it do?: What does it do? ACOM translates dollar flows of commodities from ISAM and AA into truck trips by four size categories
ISAM for E-E
AA for I-I
Both for E-I and I-E
These trips are different than service and sales calls made by employees covered in DCOM.
Minimal overlap between ACOM and DCOM
General Model Flow: General Model Flow ISAM AA Distance
External to External Flow: External to External Flow ISAM AA Distance
Internal to Internal Flow: Internal to Internal Flow ISAM AA Distance
Internal to External Flow: Internal to External Flow
ETAZ and TAZ Weights: ETAZ and TAZ Weights ETAZ – based on
Average production and consumption per employee by category from AA and
Employment by category by ETAZ
TAZ – based on production and consumption summary by TAZ from AA
$ Flows to Truck Trips by Size: $ Flows to Truck Trips by Size Truck $’s to
Truck tons Split Truck tons
by Truck Size Convert to
Truck trips Distance Factors Total $’s to Truck $’s Convert to time periods by STCC
Calibration: Calibration Each of the models uses a gamma function to calculate deterrence as a function of distance and three parameters
The parameters can be adjusted up or down to match trip lengths and distribution shapes
Calibration Targets
Ohio county to external state for Statewide Cordon Roadside Survey
Selected MPO County to other Ohio counties truck trips from MPO Roadside Surveys
Average trip lengths by area from CFS97 and Transearch
Average Truck Trip Lengths: Average Truck Trip Lengths
Average Truck Trip Lengths: Average Truck Trip Lengths
System Calibration Process and Targets: System Calibration Process and Targets The Statewide Modeling System
Four Stages of Parameter Development: Four Stages of Parameter Development S1: Parameter estimation - parameters are developed for each module separately and individually. Statistical methods are used to estimate appropriate values where suitable data are available.
S2: Initial calibration - also involves the fit of each module in isolation but inputs include those provided by other modules. Parameters are adjusted to match module-specific targets.
S3: Base year calibration – consolidating results of full model chain run and comparing to observed system flows. Selected S2 parameters revisited considering relative LOC.
S4: Temporal(+) calibration – evaluation of model forecasts in comparison to independent forecast results. Selected S3 parameters revisited considering relative LOC.
S3 Calibration OD Checks: S3 Calibration OD Checks
Total auto and total truck trips crossing model area and Ohio cordons versus counts
Ohio county to external state auto and truck trips versus roadside survey for Ohio cordon
For counties entirely within MPO roadside survey cordon, OD flows to counties entirely outside MPO cordon versus MPO roadside survey
MPO Roadside Survey Cordons: MPO Roadside Survey Cordons
Slide36: OD Analysis Districts
Initial results for auto vehicle trip OD (1): Initial results for auto vehicle trip OD (1)
Initial results for auto vehicle trip OD (2): Initial results for auto vehicle trip OD (2)
Acceptable Error by Volume: Acceptable Error by Volume Source: ODOT Assign2000.doc, by Greg Giaimo
S3 Calibration Global Assignment Checks: S3 Calibration Global Assignment Checks VMT by FUNCLASS
Model Area
Ohio
MPO county groups
Major Screenline Volumes by FUNCLASS
Model Area cordon
Ohio cordon
MPO cordons
Source of independent VMT estimates? Counts versus “counts”
Initial Unconstrained Auto Assignment ResultsSum of Link Flows for Links with Actual Year 2000 Counts (20,751 links): Initial Unconstrained Auto Assignment Results Sum of Link Flows for Links with Actual Year 2000 Counts (20,751 links)
Initial Unconstrained Auto Assignment ResultsSum of Link Flows for Links with Actual Year 2000 Counts (20,751 links): Initial Unconstrained Auto Assignment Results Sum of Link Flows for Links with Actual Year 2000 Counts (20,751 links)
Initial Unconstrained Auto Assignment ResultsAll Links: Initial Unconstrained Auto Assignment Results All Links
Conclusions: Conclusions This framework allows us to be consistent.
Calibration results look good so far.
More work to be done.
Questions for Pat?: Questions for Pat?
S3 Calibration Detailed Assignment Checks: S3 Calibration Detailed Assignment Checks VMT by FUNCLASS by county
Major Screenline Volumes by FUNCLASS by segment
Model Area cordon
Ohio cordon
MPO cordons
Percent RMS by volume range – see acceptable RMS error table
Plots of assigned flows versus counts
Scatterplots by FUNCLASS
Network links plots of differences
Source of independent VMT estimates? Counts versus “counts”
Acceptable RMS Error: Acceptable RMS Error Source: ODOT Assign2000.doc, by Greg Giaimo
S4 Temporal Calibration Components: S4 Temporal Calibration Components 1990 to 2000 AA-LD application
2000 to 2030 Base Forecast
Future Scenario Forecasts
Turnpike Toll Scenario
Five-County Corridor Scenario
High Speed Rail Scenario
1990 to 2000 AA-LD Application: 1990 to 2000 AA-LD Application Concept -
Begin with 1990 land use, socioeconomic characteristics, roadway network
Compare to 2000 socio-economic characteristics by AMZ
Calibrate AA-LD parameters to get acceptable results – e.g. AA inertia terms, LD transition factors
Problem –
LD depends on floorspace prices from AA to influence development choices
We have too little floorspace price data for AA price calibration and additional Assessor data collected by ODOT for additional counties has not improved the situation
We are still working on ways to overcome this problem
Forecast Scenarios: Forecast Scenarios
2000 to 2030 Base Forecast: 2000 to 2030 Base Forecast Purpose: evaluate model performance versus independent population forecasts
Inputs: 2010 and 2020 roadway networks, development overrides by TAZ
Target: ODOD population forecasts by county
Related activity: Reconcile ISAM/SPG1 forecasts for Model Area with ODOD population forecasts
Potential parameter adjustment focused on AA-LD response
Turnpike Toll Scenario: Turnpike Toll Scenario Purpose: evaluate model performance versus independent toll change response
Inputs: 2010 and 2020 roadway networks, development overrides by TAZ, change in Turnpike tolls and truck speeds in 2005
Target: Turnpike volumes by weight class
Potential parameter adjustment focused on value-of-time for trucks by Turnpike weight class
Five-County Corridor Scenario: Five-County Corridor Scenario Purpose: evaluate model response to corridor roadway improvements
Inputs: 2010 and 2020 roadway networks, development overrides by TAZ
Target: Nothing specific
Potential parameter adjustment focused on AA-LD response
High Speed Rail Scenario: High Speed Rail Scenario Purpose: evaluate model performance versus independent HSR forecasts
Inputs: 2010 and 2020 roadway networks, development overrides by TAZ, HSR ALT 1 & 2 intercity rail networks
Target: Rail ridership forecasts from Ohio Rail Hub Strategic Study
Potential parameter adjustment focused on LDT mode choice parameters