FSUTMS Transit Modeling Framework: Status Update

1
FSUTMS Transit Modeling FrameworkStatus Update

• November 28th, 2007

2
Topics

• Framework status update
• Planned enhancements for Framework

3

• Framework status update

4
Framework Timeline (1 of 2)

• Winter 2006
• Introduced at MTF
• Finalized summary documentation
• Spring 2007
• Finalized external programs
• Developed path-building setups
• Developed training workbook

5
Framework Timeline (2 of 2)

• Summer 2007
• Developed FAQ
• Updated external programs documentation
• Fall 2007
• Scripted REWALK program

6
Outreach

• Framework web page on FSUTMSOnline
• Frequently Asked Questions document
• 3-day training workshops
• June 2007 (Orlando)
• November 2007 (Clearwater)
• April 2008 (Orlando)
• Technical support

7
Web Resources

• Documents
• Theoretical applied summaries
• FAQ list
• Training workbook
• Instructions for external programs
• Programs/Scripts
• Auto-access connector
• Assignment reporting
• Percent walk/walk connector coordination
• Path-building setups (Tiers A B/C)
• Training model

All these resources are available on
FSUTMSOnline.net
8
Transit Modeling Web Page

• http//www.fsutmsonline.net/index.php?/transit_mod
  eling/comments/new_fsutms_transit_modeling_framewo
  rk

9
Framework Implementations

• Successfully implemented for METROPLAN Orlando
  model
• Tranplan ? Voyager conversion
• No other major changes to transit model other
  than transition to new Framework
• Under development
• CFRPM
• Tranplan ? Voyager conversion
• Transition to new Framework only major change to
  transit model
• Miami-Dade only task is to implement Framework
• NERPM tasks include
• Incorporating Framework
• Making transit model compliant with known FTA New
  Starts modeling guidance
• Validate to 2005 base year
• Incorporate latest travel data (on-board, speeds)

10
Framework ImplementationsIssues

• Required modifications to existing mode choice
  models due to Framework not explicitly described
• Resulted in Transit Framework FAQ
• Minor adjustments needed to AUTOCON TAREPORT
• Handling decimal node coordinates (AUTOCON)
• Handling separate peak/off-peak networks
  (TAREPORT)
• Corrected bug in TAREPORT program that
  incorrectly reported route-level Pax-Mi and
  Pax-Hr calculations

11
Framework ImplementationsImpressions

• Overall Framework holding up well no changes
• Framework not applicable to areas with unique
  markets
• Example Fringe parking in Jacksonville
• Expecting AUTOCON TAREPORT to need minor
  changes as more models are converted to new
  Framework
• Available information may not be sufficient for
  easy conversion

12

• Planned Enhancements for Framework
• Short-Term

13
Develop Transit Model Application (1 of 2)

• Virtually complete transit model, includes
  connectors, path-building, mode choice
  assignment steps
• Benefits
• Simplified model development, with reduced time
  cost
• Consistency within all elements
• Two setups
• Tier A no percent walks, simplified transit
  paths
• Tiers B/C percent walks, expanded transit paths

14
Develop Transit Model Application (2 of 2)

• Mode choice features
• Written in Voyager script
• Auto-calibration routine
• Ability to create data files for Summit
• Non-included elements
• Transit networks
• Percent walks
• Transit speed methodology and computations
• Description instructions how to incorporate
  into model will be documented

15
Other Short-Term Enhancements

• Script transit assignment reporting program
• Conversion from FORTRAN
• Consistent with goal of eliminating external
  programs
• Enhance AUTOCON with ability to read Voyager
  matrices
• Existing version requires conversion of skims to
  Tranplan-format

16
Other Short-Term Enhancements

• Review transit path-building parameters
• Review transit surveys conducted across the state
  within the past 5-10 years
• Suggest possible changes in connector- and
  path-building logic, with emphasis on auto-access
  connectors

17

• Planned Enhancements for Framework
• Medium-Term

18
Generic Mode Choice Model (1 of 2)

• Objective
• To provide flexible scripts similar to existing
  generalized nested logit program
• Key issues
• Voyager script not as flexible as program
• Could be implemented in at least three ways
• External program used to develop script(s) or
• PILOT script to create a script
• Generic script
• More variety of structures likely available via
  external program or PILOT script

19
Generic Mode Choice Model (2 of 2)

• Key issues (contd)
• Is it necessary if transit model application is
  already available?
• Would like input from Transit Committee on
  priority

20
Other Medium-Term Enhancements

• Script auto-access connector program, AUTOCON
• Will fulfill goal of eliminating all external
  programs
• Cannot be completed without additional features,
  specifically with GENERATE control statement
• Revise transit modeling workshop
• Focus on correct use of transit model application
• Simplify technical elements

21

• Planned Enhancements for Framework
• Long-Term

22
Long-Term Enhancements

• Research multi-path approaches
• Key objectives
• Adds value beyond existing single-path/nested
  logit mode choice approach
• Consistent with New Starts guidance
• Continue testing began in 2006
• Investigate possibility of computing percent
  walks within model stream
• Would eliminate offline GIS computations file
  preparations
• Depends on future versions of Voyager