urban street reliability evaluation using the highway capacity
TRANSCRIPT
James A. BonnesonKittelson & Associates, Inc.
July 2012
Urban Street Reliability EvaluationUsing the Highway Capacity Manual
OverviewOverview
• SHRP 2 Research Project L08 Overview• Evaluation Framework• Illustrative Analysis Capabilities
2
Project L08 OverviewProject L08 Overview
• SHRP 2 Project L08• “Incorporation of Travel Time Reliability into the Highway
Capacity Manual”
• Objectives
– Determine how non-recurrent congestion impacts can be incorporated into HCM procedures
– Develop methodologies to predict travel time reliability on freeway facilities and urban streets
– Prepare a guide with that is suitable for potential inclusion in a future update of the HCM 2010
• Project schedule
– Ends March 2013
BackgroundBackground
• Terms– Scenario – a unique combination of volume and traffic control
conditions for one analysis period (e.g., 15-min, or 1 hour)
– Study period – one or more consecutive scenarios during a day (e.g., 3-hour period from 3:30 pm to 6:30 pm)
– Reliability reporting period – days evaluated (e.g., all week days for one year)
4
Reliability Performance MeasuresReliability Performance Measures
• Basis of Reliability Performance Measures– Travel time distribution for reliability reporting period
• Goal– Quantify reliability of estimate travel time
• Basic Distribution Measures– Distribution statistics (e.g., standard deviation)
– Percentile-based measures (e.g., 95th percentile travel time)
• Normalized Measures– Buffer time: 95th % travel time divided by average travel time
– Planning time index: 95th % travel time divided by free-flow time
• Other Measures– On-time measures: percent trips completed by specified travel time
– Failure measures: percent trips not completed by specified travel time
Reliability Performance MeasuresReliability Performance Measures
Reliability Performance MeasuresReliability Performance Measures
• Buffer Time– 95th % travel time divided by average travel time
Travel time, s
Probability
00
LOS B LOS D
Travel time, s
Probability
00
LOS B LOS D
"Reliable" "Reliable"
"Unreliable" "Unreliable"
Reliability Performance MeasuresReliability Performance Measures
• Planning Time Index– 95th % travel time divided by free-flow time
Travel time, s
Probability
00
LOS B LOS D
Travel time, s
Probability
00
LOS B LOS D
"Reliable"
"Moderate Reliability"
"Unreliable"
"Unreliable"
Free-Flow Travel Time
Free-Flow Travel Time
FrameworkFramework
• Development Goals for Urban Streets Reliability Evaluation– Quantify the effect of non-recurring congestion sources
• Weather• Demand variation• Incidents• Work zones• Special events
– Minimize the amount of required input data
– Assemble a set of nationally-representative default values
– Use 2010 HCM Urban Streets methodology to compute travel time
9
FrameworkFramework
• Work Flow– Start with the input data used to evaluate an urban street facility
using the 2010 HCM Urban Streets methodology• Enter the data in the urban streets engine and save it to a file• If desired, enter and save data for each work zone or special event
– Read the file and use it as a basis for scenario generation• Work day-by-day, analysis-period-by-analysis-period in chronologic
order through the year...– Predict weather events– Predict incident events– Adjust speed and saturation flow rate based on events– Adjust demand volumes using hourly, weekly, monthly factors– Save one revised file for each analysis period
– Submit each revised file to the urban streets engine
– Collect performance measures and compute reliability statistics
10
Manual
Software
FrameworkFramework
• Flow Chart
11
FrameworkFramework
• Input Data– Nearest city– Functional class– Analysis period duration (0.25 hr or 1.0 hr)– Study period duration (e.g., 7:00 am, extend for 3 hours)– Reliability reporting period (e.g., 1/1/2011, extend for 365 days)– Days of week considered (Su, M, Tu, W, Th, F, Sa)– Crash frequency by
• Segment• Intersection
– If work zone or special event present• Operating period (e.g., 4/1/2011, extend for 30 days)• Crash frequency adjustment factors
FrameworkFramework
• Work Zones and Special Events– Each is dealt with as a unique case for a unique time period
• Identify volume, geometry, and signal timing for each case– Include specific changes due to work zone or special event
» Lane closures» Alternative lane assignments» Special signal timing
• Create one urban streets engine input file for each case• Establish operating period (e.g., 4/1/2011, extend for 30 days)• Determine crash frequency adjustment factors
– Traffic demand changes• Not predicted• If analyst can estimate demand shifts, they can be reflected in
volumes entered in the input file
Urban Streets Reliability EngineUrban Streets Reliability Engine
• Welcome
14
Scenario GenerationScenario Generation
• Set Up
15
Scenario GenerationScenario Generation
• Set Up
16
Scenario GenerationScenario Generation
17
Performance SummaryPerformance Summary
18
Performance SummaryPerformance Summary
• Performance Measures– By Direction
• EB/NB• WB/SB
– By System Component• Facility• Segment
– By Performance Measure• Travel time• Travel speed• Stop rate• Running time• Through delay
• Examples– EB direction
19
Performance SummaryPerformance Summary
• Facility Travel Time (s) – PTI = 2.9
• Note– Maximum travel time
• 800 s
– Two crashes at same time but different intersections
20
Summary StatisticsScenario evaluation interval: 1 Average: 120.38 5th percentile: 91.29Base free-flow speed, mi/h: 40.78 Standard deviation: 38.34 10th percentile: 92.45Base free-flow travel time, s: 60.20 Skewness: 7.72 80th percentile: 139.79
Median: 109.73 85th percentile: 143.76Number of obs.: 3120 95th percentile: 172.59
Planning Time
Performance SummaryPerformance Summary
Summary StatisticsScenario evaluation interval: 1 Average: 21.52 5th percentile: 14.22Base free-flow speed, mi/h: 40.78 Standard deviation: 4.29 10th percentile: 16.06Base free-flow travel time, s: 60.20 Skewness: -0.58 80th percentile: 25.91
Median: 22.37 85th percentile: 26.25Number of obs.: 3120 95th percentile: 26.89
21
ABCDEF• Facility Travel
Speed(mi/h) • Note
– 10 percent of analysis periods have LOS E or F
Urban Streets Reliability MethodologyUrban Streets Reliability Methodology
• Framework– Overview of next three parts
• Scenario Generation• Facility Evaluation• Performance Summary• Illustrative Analysis Capabilities
22
Illustrative Analysis CapabilitiesIllustrative Analysis Capabilities
• Alternatives Analysis– Compare base condition to alternative condition
• Analysis Scenarios– Work zones and special events
• Alternative start dates and durations• Alternative lane closures and signal timing strategies
– Weather• Examine operational effects of strategies that reduce weather-
related crashes or crash severity (i.e., snow removal, resurfacing)
– Incidents• Examine operational effects of strategies that reduce incident
duration• Evaluate benefit of providing shoulder for stalled vehicle refuge
– Design or Operation• Evaluate alternative signal timing plans• Evaluate intersection lane allocations or segment geometry
23
ClosureClosure
• Questions or Comments?