Microsimulation for Rural and Exurban Regions: Lake County, California David Gerstle (presenting)...

Microsimulation for Rural and Exurban

Regions:Lake County, California

David Gerstle (presenting) & Zheng Wei

Caliper Corporation

Executive Summary

• Microsimulation is an important tool for modeling exurban and rural areas

• Congestion is often not an important driver of travel times

• “Minutia” such as grade, curvature, and lane widths are vitally important

• Shown using a case-study of Lake County, California using Caliper’s TransModeler microsimulation software:– Show how we calibrated & validated the model– Show failure to validate absent grade,

curvature, lane widths, etc.

Outline

• Project Background• Model Scope• Model Preparation• Model Minutia

Outline

Project Background

• Lake County Area Microsimulation Model (LAMM)

• To develop a traffic simulation model that:– Supports planning and operational

analysis– Focuses on SR-20, SR-53, and SR-29 and

the communities surrounding Clear Lake– Extends and complements existing

models and modeling activities• To evaluate future-year scenarios

Project Background

Lake County

• Approx. 2 hr. drive from SFO to southern Lake County

LakeCountyLake County

Project Background

• Dominant route for through traffic passes through populated areas

Outline

• Project Background• Model Scope

– Geography– Time Periods & Vehicle Population

• Model Preparation• Model Minutia

LakeCounty

Study Area

LakeCounty

• 450 square miles of Lake County, from Middletown (Napa border) to Upper Lake (Mendocino border)

Study Area

LakeCounty

Level of Detail

LakeCounty

• 720 miles of roadway (120 miles on State Routes)

• 4,200 Links and 3,300 Nodes• All roads in the regional travel

demand model are included

Level of Detail

LakeCounty

• High level of detail for local streets

Level of Detail

LakeCounty

• Intersection geometry accurately reproduced

Level of Detail

Outline

• Project Background• Model Scope

– Geography– Time Periods & Vehicle Population

• Model Preparation• Model Minutia

Time Periods & Vehicle Population

• Times of day include two peak periods– 6:00 – 9:00 AM – 3:00 – 6:00 PM

• Vehicle Population– Auto– Truck

Time Periods & Vehicle Population

• Times of day include two peak periods– 6:00 – 9:00 AM – 3:00 – 6:00 PM

• Vehicle Population– Auto– Truck

Outline

• Project Background• Model Scope• Model Preparation

– Data Collection– Model Calibration– Model Validation

• Model Minutia

Outline

– Data Collection– Model Calibration– Model Validation

• Model Minutia

Data Collection

• GPS-recorded travel times• O-D surveys• Turning movement counts• Directional counts

Data Collection

O-D Survey Sites (5)

Turning Movement (20)

Directional Counts (26)

GPS Travel Times

Data Collection

GPS Travel Times

Data Collection

GPS Travel Times

Data Collection

GPS Travel Times

Outline

– Data Collection– Model Calibration – Model Validation

• Model Minutia

Model Calibration

• Take the calibrated travel demand model as the starting point

• Iteratively cycle between– Trying to match turn & directional counts– Trying to equilibrate route choices

• Target traffic count calibration standards set by Caltrans

Model Calibration

Calibrated Travel Demand Model

Match Counts(ODME)

Match Times(DTA)

Calibrated Micro-simulation Model

Model Calibration

1st Hour 2nd Hour 3rd Hour All

Individual Roads Yes Yes Yes Yes

Total Yes Yes Yes Yes

Individual Movements Yes Yes Yes Yes

Individual Movements n/a n/a n/a n/a

Total n/a n/a n/a n/a

Individual Movements Yes Yes Yes Yes

Individual Movements n/a n/a n/a n/a

Total n/a n/a n/a n/a

Segment Flows

% Difference

Statistical Significance

Turning Movement

% Difference

Meets Standard?

Segment Flows

% Difference

Turning Movement

% Difference

Outline

– Data Collection– Model Calibration – Model Validation

• Model Minutia

Model Validation

• Take the calibrated traffic simulation model as the starting point

• Iteratively cycle between– Trying to match point-to-point travel times– Reviewing/revisiting model development and

calibration steps• Target travel time calibration standards

set by Caltrans

Model Validation

• Take the calibrated traffic simulation model as the starting point

• Iteratively cycle between– Trying to match point-to-point travel times– Reviewing/revisiting model development and

calibration steps• Target travel time calibration standards

set by Caltrans

Calibrated Traffic Simulation Model

Revisit Calibration(ODME/DTA)

Match Times (Simulation)

ValidatedMicro-simulation

Model Validation

Boundary

Upper Lake

Lucerne

Lower Lake

Kelseyville

Middletown

Point-to-Point Travel Times

Boundary

Upper Lake

Lucerne

Lower Lake

Kelseyville

Middletown

GPS: 15.95 minTSM: 15.89 min: 0.36%

GPS: 11.29 minTSM: 8.95 min: 23.07%GPS: 16.92

minTSM: 17.79 min: 5.01%

GPS: 13.35 minTSM: 15.03 min: 11.82%

GPS: 6.63 minTSM: 6.82 min: 2.9%

GPS: 15.92 minTSM: 16.17 min: 1.61%

GPS: 20.25 minTSM: 21.63 min: 6.85%

Model ValidationAM Southbound Travel Times

Boundary

Upper Lake

Lucerne

Lower Lake

Kelseyville

Middletown

GPS: 15.65 minTSM: 16.53 min: 5.49%

GPS: 13.12 minTSM: 8.93 min: 37.98%GPS: 17.52min

TSM: 18.21 min: 3.84%

GPS: 13.87 minTSM: 14.87 min: 6.99%

GPS: 6.48 minTSM: 6.97 min: 7.21%

GPS: 15.22 minTSM: 16.56 min: 10.56%

GPS: 20.53 minTSM: 21.86 min: 6.31%

Model ValidationAM Northbound Travel Times

Boundary

Upper Lake

Lucerne

Lower Lake

Kelseyville

Middletown

GPS: 15.58 minTSM: 16.38 min: 5.01%

minTSM: 17.95 min: 6.26%

GPS: 13.51 minTSM: 15.34 min: 12.73%

GPS: 6.24 minTSM: 6.96 min: 10.92%

GPS: 16.03 minTSM: 16.61 min: 3.56%

GPS: 20.52 minTSM: 21.62 min:5.21%

Model ValidationPM Southbound Travel Times

Boundary

Upper Lake

Lucerne

Lower Lake

Kelseyville

Middletown

GPS: 15.02 minTSM: 16.58 min: 9.88%

minTSM: 18.55 min: 9.81%

GPS: 13.12 minTSM: 15.03 min: 13.53%

GPS: 6.55 minTSM: 6.99 min: 6.45%

GPS: 17.31 minTSM: 16.54 min: 4.57%

GPS: 19.96 minTSM: 22.42 min: 11.60%

Model ValidationPM Northbound Travel Times

Model Validation

From To LB TSM TT Avg. TSM TT UB TSM TT Avg. GPS TT % difference TSM is…Boundary Upper Lake 6.68 6.82 6.97 6.63 2.90% LongerUpper Lake Lucerne 15.32 15.89 16.55 15.95 0.36% ShorterLucerne SR 53 14.73 15.03 15.38 13.35 11.82% LongerSR 53 Lower Lake 8.84 8.95 9.06 11.29 23.07% ShorterLower Lake Middletown 21.54 21.69 21.82 20.25 6.85% LongerUpper Lake Kelseyville 15.93 16.22 16.52 15.37 5.34% LongerKelseyville Lower Lake 17.34 17.84 18.43 16.41 8.38% LongerUpper Lake Boundary 6.91 6.97 7.02 6.48 7.21% LongerLucerne Upper Lake 16.30 16.53 16.76 15.65 5.49% LongerSR 53 Lucerne 14.60 14.87 15.17 13.87 6.99% LongerLower Lake SR 53 8.81 8.93 9.05 13.12 37.98% ShorterMiddletown Lower Lake 21.61 21.86 22.13 20.53 6.31% LongerKelseyville Upper Lake 16.35 16.56 16.81 15.22 8.48% LongerLower Lake Kelseyville 17.99 18.21 18.43 17.52 3.84% Longer

Model Validation

Lower and Upper Bounds calculated by bootstrapping sample

Model Validation

1.Create bootstrapped sample of the set of simulation runs2.For each run in bootstrapped sample, create

bootstrapped sample of point-to-point travel times3.Calculate expected travel time for each simulation run

Model Validation

1.Create bootstrapped sample of the set of simulation runs2.For each run in bootstrapped sample, create

bootstrapped sample of point-to-point travel times3.Calculate expected travel time for each simulation run

Which is to say this is NOT an average of all of the point-to-point travel times

Model Validation

From To LB TSM TT Avg. TSM TT UB TSM TT Avg. GPS TT % difference TSM is…Boundary Upper Lake 6.90 6.96 7.02 6.24 10.92% LongerUpper Lake Lucerne 16.15 16.38 16.61 15.58 5.01% LongerLucerne SR 53 15.13 15.34 15.56 13.51 12.73% LongerSR 53 Lower Lake 9.19 9.30 9.41 10.66 13.64% ShorterLower Lake Middletown 21.42 21.62 21.82 20.52 5.21% LongerUpper Lake Kelseyville 16.34 16.61 16.89 16.03 3.56% LongerKelseyville Lower Lake 17.66 17.95 18.25 16.86 6.26% LongerUpper Lake Boundary 6.92 6.99 7.05 6.55 6.45% LongerLucerne Upper Lake 16.36 16.58 16.78 15.02 9.88% LongerSR 53 Lucerne 14.84 15.03 15.20 13.12 13.53% LongerLower Lake SR 53 9.10 9.21 9.31 10.14 9.60% ShorterMiddletown Lower Lake 22.28 22.42 22.57 19.96 11.60% LongerKelseyville Upper Lake 16.28 16.54 16.81 17.31 4.57% ShorterLower Lake Kelseyville 18.15 18.55 19.02 16.82 9.81% Longer

Outline

– Curvature– Grade– Lane Width– Two-lane Highway Passing

Outline

Curvature

Radius of 20ft, curvature of (1/20ft)*1000ft = 50 in Segment layer

Curvature

Maximum speed is constrained by the radius

Curvature

AM PM AM PM AM PMNB 0.00% SB 0.00% NB 5.13% SB 5.13% NB 9.89% SB 9.89% NB 0.00% SB 0.00% NB 0.04% SB 0.04% NB 0.00% SB 0.00% NB 0.00% SB 0.00%

Percent with Radius < 498 ft

Effect of No Curvature on Expected Travel Time...Median 95th Percentile

Boundary/Upper Lake

Upper Lake/Lucerne

Lucerne/SR 53

Upper Lake/Kelseyville

Kelseyville/Lower Lake

Lower Lake/Middletown

SR 53/Lower Lake

Curvature

Boundary/Upper Lake

Upper Lake/Lucerne

Lucerne/SR 53

SR 53/Lower Lake

Curvature at which maximum speed 55 mph

Curvature

Boundary/Upper Lake

Upper Lake/Lucerne

Lucerne/SR 53

SR 53/Lower Lake

Reduction in Travel Time for two pairs with most curvature

Outline

30 ft of elevation gain, from USGS DEM

1,000 ft long

3% Grade

Effect on Acceleration

Effect on Max. Speed

AM PM AM PM AM PMNB 1.54% SB 1.54% NB 5.40% SB 5.40% NB 4.64% SB 4.64% NB 5.39% SB 5.04% NB 26.58% SB 26.58% NB 16.37% SB 16.67% NB 16.24% SB 12.50% SR

SR 53/Lower Lake

Percent with Abs. Grade > 4

Boundary/Upper Lake

Upper Lake/Lucerne

Lucerne/SR 53

Mean Median 95th PercentileEffect of No Grade on Population Travel Time...

SR 53/Lower Lake

Boundary/Upper Lake

Upper Lake/Lucerne

Lucerne/SR 53

Now looking at statistics across all point-to-point Travel Times (not at simulation run level)

SR 53/Lower Lake

Boundary/Upper Lake

Upper Lake/Lucerne

Lucerne/SR 53

Effect is opposite for uphill vs. downhill

Outline

Lane Width

12 ft lane

11 ft lane

10 ft lane

Lane Width

12 ft lane

11 ft lane

10 ft lane

Lane Width

SR 53/Lower Lake

Effect of Lane Width on Expected Travel Time...Mean Median 95th Percentile

Boundary/Upper Lake

Upper Lake/Lucerne

Lucerne/SR 53

Percent with Non-12ft Lanes

Lane Width

SR 53/Lower Lake

Boundary/Upper Lake

Upper Lake/Lucerne

Lucerne/SR 53

Back to Expected Travel Time

Lane Width

SR 53/Lower Lake

Boundary/Upper Lake

Upper Lake/Lucerne

Lucerne/SR 53

Travel Time drops without Lane Width restriction

Outline

Two-lane Highway Passing

Two-Lane Highway Passing

SR 53/Lower Lake

Boundary/Upper Lake

Upper Lake/Lucerne

Lucerne/SR 53

Mean Median 95th PercentilePercent with

Passing Allowed

Effect of No Passing on Population Travel Time...

SR 53/Lower Lake

Boundary/Upper Lake

Upper Lake/Lucerne

Lucerne/SR 53

Passing Allowed

Now looking at statistics across all point-to-point Travel Times (not at simulation run level)

SR 53/Lower Lake

Boundary/Upper Lake

Upper Lake/Lucerne

Lucerne/SR 53

Passing Allowed

• Generally increases travel time, as expected• Exceptions are due to network effects

Conclusion

Lane level detail is essential for accurate modeling of rural and exurban regions

Conclusion

Lane level detail is essential for accurate modeling of rural and exurban regions, and, as a corollary, microsimulation is essential for accurate modeling of rural and exurban regions

Thank you

david@caliper.com

Microsimulation for Rural and Exurban Regions: Lake County, California David Gerstle (presenting)...

Documents

fy08 pt3 exurban travel reformatted - Home - AMPO covering exurban commuters and analysis of Census and other data over time tracks the growth of exurban travel in the TPB region and

Exurban development in the Winnipeg region : the issue of ... segment of most diffuse urban settlement in the metropolitan region is the exurban area. "Exurbs" refer to the scattered

Theodore Roosevelt and the Divided Character of American Nationalism Gary Gerstle

REGIONAL MICROSIMULATION AS A TOOL FOR IMPROVING … · regional microsimulation model as a warehouse of microsimulation inputs including geometry, signage, signal timings, traffic

Forest birds respond to the spatial pattern of exurban ... · Forest birds respond to the spatial pattern of exurban development in the Mid-Atlantic region, USA Marcela Suarez-Rubio1

A Microsimulation Traffic Model to Estimate Accidents · PDF fileA Microsimulation Traffic Model to Estimate Accidents ... happen because each follower could not ... A Microsimulation

The Urban-Suburban-Exurban- Rural Continuum: Definitions ... · The Urban-Suburban-Exurban-Rural Continuum: Definitions, Trends and Interdependences Elena Irwin. Professor, Department

Exurban Settlement Pattern and the Exurban Condition

Exurban Settlement Pattern and the Exurban Condition: A ... · A Typology of US Metropolitan Areas ... (Gordon and Richardson 1997). The empirical evidence on this point is mixed,

Microsimulation approach in fertility projections

Variations in development of exurban residential landscapes ...danbrown/papers/an_jlus...Variations in development of exurban residential landscapes: timing, location, and driving

Activity Based Microsimulation Models

Environmental Consequences of Exurban Expansion in an Agricultural Area

Microsimulation Presentation

Demystifying Microsimulation - Meeting Report · summary | meeting on demystifying microsimulation | november 16, 2012 demystifying microsimulation u.s. department of health and human

Traffic Microsimulation Modellingcundall.com/Cundall/fckeditor/editor/images/UserFilesUpload/file/Transportation...Traffic Microsimulation Modelling Airside simulation A critical and

]978002]25-26]...H. Gerstle, "EBCAP: A ComputerProgram to Analyze Rotor Fragment Gerstle, "EBCAP: A ComputerProgram to Analyze Rotor Fragment Impact on Plate/Shell ContainmentShields,"

The Exurban Phenomenon in Arizona. Learning Objectives Compare/contrast definitions of “Exurban” Compare/contrast definitions of “Exurban” Understand

On Exurban Development · development. This paper presents a novel theory of exurban development, based upon heterogeneity of people and a relative paucity of the types who prefer

ACT Traffic Microsimulation Modelling Guidelines...traffic microsimulation models as there is no set benchmark that can be referred to. Microsimulation modelling is the most detailed