A Research Project
Report
For the National
ITS Implementation Research Center
A U.S. DOT University Transportation Center
Feasibility
Assessment of ITS Deployment Analysis System (IDAS) for ITS Evaluation
Feasibility Assessment of ITS Deployment Analysis System (IDAS) for ITS Evaluation
By:
Ilsoo Yun
Byungkyu (Brian) Park
A Research
Project Report
For the
Center for ITS Implementation Research (ITS)
A U.S. DOT University Transportation Center
Ilsoo Yun
Department of
Civil Engineering`
Email:
iy6m@virginia.edu
Dr. Byungkyu (Brian) Park
Department of
Civil Engineering
Email:
bpark@virginia.edu
Center for Transportation Studies at the University of Virginia produces outstanding transportation professionals, innovative research results and provides important public service. The Center for Transportation Studies is committed to academic excellence, multi-disciplinary research and to developing state-of-the-art facilities. Through a partnership with the Virginia Department of Transportation’s (VDOT) Research Council (VTRC), CTS faculty hold joint appointments, VTRC research scientists teach specialized courses, and graduate student work is supported through a Graduate Research Assistantship Program. CTS receives substantial financial support from two federal University Transportation Center Grants: the Mid-Atlantic Universities Transportation Center (MAUTC), and through the National ITS Implementation Research Center (ITS Center). Other related research activities of the faculty include funding through FHWA, NSF, US Department of Transportation, VDOT, other governmental agencies and private companies.
Disclaimer:
The contents of this report
reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the
accuracy of the information presented herein.
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of
Transportation, University Transportation Centers Program, in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for
the contents or use thereof.
1. Report No. |
2. Government Accession No. |
3. Recipient’s Catalog No. |
||
|
UVACTS-15-0-72 |
|
|
||
|
4. Title and Subtitle |
5. Report Date |
|||
|
Feasibility Assessment of ITS Deployment Analysis System (IDAS) for
ITS Evaluation |
December 2003 |
|||
|
|
6. Performing Organization Code |
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
7. Author(s) Ilsoo Yun and Byungkyu (Brian) Park |
8. Performing Organization Report No. |
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
9. Performing Organization and Address |
10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) |
|||
|
Center for Transportation Studies |
|
|||
|
University of Virginia |
11. Contract or Grant No. |
|||
|
PO Box 400742 Charlottesville, VA 22904-7472 |
|
|||
|
12. Sponsoring Agencies' Name and Address |
13. Type of Report and Period Covered |
|||
|
Office of University Programs, Research and Special Programs
Administration US Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW Washington DC 20590-0001 |
|
Final Report |
||
|
|
|
14. Sponsoring Agency Code |
||
|
|
|
|
||
|
15. Supplementary Notes |
||||
|
|
||||
|
16. Abstract |
||||
|
This study investigated the feasibility
of utilizing the ITS Deployment Analysis System (IDAS) program version 2.2 as
a tool for evaluating ITS deployment plans.
Firstly, an online survey was conducted among MPO staff in the US in
order to understand the usage and the issues in the IDAS for the ITS
deployment plan evaluation. Secondly,
case studies were carried out to examine the benefits of deploying several
popular ITS options. The survey results indicated that the usage of the IDAS program was
somewhat limited among MPOs. The
survey results also indicated that the most desired updates in the IDAS
program were (i) elaborating ITS impact methodologies, (ii) upgrading default
values in the cost and benefit modules and (iii) incorporating emission
factors based on MOBILE 6. The case
studies of Hampton Roads area and a simple network with six popular ITS
options identified the following three issues: (i) overestimation of ITS
option benefits when the benefits are estimated from travel time savings,
(ii) incorrect interpolation on travel time reliability rates for non-integer
V/C ratios, and (iii) insensitive cost savings for combined ITS options.
|
||||
|
17 Key Words |
18. Distribution Statement |
|||
|
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), ITS Deployment Analysis
System IDAS), Feasibility Assessment |
No restrictions. This document is available to the public. |
|||
Abstract
This study investigated the feasibility of utilizing the ITS Deployment Analysis System (IDAS) program version 2.2 as a tool for evaluating ITS deployment plans. Firstly, an online survey was conducted among MPO staff in the US in order to understand the usage and the issues of the IDAS program for the ITS deployment plan evaluation. Secondly, case studies were carried out to examine the benefits of deploying several popular ITS options.
The survey results indicated that the usage of the IDAS program was somewhat limited among MPOs. The survey results also indicated that the most desired updates in the IDAS program were (i) elaborating ITS impact methodologies, (ii) upgrading default values in the cost and benefit modules and (iii) incorporating emission factors based on MOBILE 6. The case studies of Hampton Roads area and a simple network with six popular ITS options identified three issues: (i) overestimation of ITS option benefits when the benefits are estimated from travel time savings, (ii) incorrect interpolation on travel time reliability rates for non-integer V/C ratios, and (iii) insensitive cost savings for combined ITS options.
Table of Contents
2 ITS
Deployment Analysis System (IDAS)
2.2 Benefit-Cost Summary and Performance Summary
4 Hampton
Roads Case Study for IDAS Feasibility
4.2 Strategic ITS Deployment Plan in Hampton Roads
4.3.1 Central Control Signal Coordination
4.3.2 Incident Detection/Verification/Response/Management combined
4.3.3 Highway Advisory Radio (HAR)
4.3.4 Dynamic Message Sign (DMS)
4.3.5 Telephone-based Traveler Information System
4.3.6 Web/Internet-based Traveler Information System
4.3.7 Setting for Running the IDAS Benefits Module
4.4.1 Transportation Planning Model
4.4.3 Assessment of Feasibility through Effects of Coupling
4.5 Issues Identified from the Case Study
5 Simple
Network Case Study for IDAS Validation
5.2 IDAS Analysis by V/C Ratio
6 Conclusions
and Proposed Recommendations
Appendix A. Result of IDAS Survey
Appendix B. Result of IDAS Performance by V/C
Ratio
Table of Figures
Figure 1. Location of Hampton Roads Area
Figure 2. Volume Delay Curve for Urban Area
Table of Tables
Table 1. Responses about Awareness and Experience of Using IDAS
Table 2. Responses about Usage of IDAS
Table 3. Confidence on IDAS Results
Table 4. List of Priority User Services
Table 5. Selected User Services and ITS Elements
Table 6. Selected Settings for IDAS Benefits Analysis
Table 7. Summary of Benefits and Costs for Six ITS Options
Table 8. Summary of Benefits and Costs with Sharing Option
Table 9. Change in Benefits and Costs with Sharing Option
Table 10. Trip Table for V/C 1.0
Table 11. Changes in Total Annual Benefits by different V/C Levels
Table 12. Travel Time Reliability Rate by the Number of Lanes and V/C
During past two decades the Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) has been deployed throughout major metropolitan areas and a few selected urban and rural areas. With considerable benefits reported from such deployments, more ITS implementation plans are expected to be developed and these plans need to be evaluated for prioritization and feasibility testing. As traditional transportation planning models are not readily applicable for such evaluations and the use of microscopic simulation tools is somewhat limited due to the significant efforts required for the network coding, simulation calibration and validation, and computation time, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) supported the development of a sketch-level tool called ITS Deployment Analysis System (IDAS) for the evaluation of ITS deployments. The IDAS program has capabilities of (i) screening and prioritizing ITS alternatives and (ii) calculating relevant benefits and costs for such alternatives.
A few studies utilized the IDAS program for the evaluation of ITS projects. Sadek and Baah (1) used the IDAS program to estimate the benefits of deploying three ITS improvements: smart corridor project, transit vehicle AVL and I-89 ATMS in Chittenden County, Vermont. In order to examine IDAS’s applicability in evaluating ITS benefits, they performed sensitivity analyses of a few selected parameters and found certain parameters tend to have more significant impacts on the results. Heither and Thomas (2) tested the IDAS software through analyzing several types of ITS deployments (electronic toll collection and freeway variable message signs for highway deployments, and electronic transit fare collection system and transit vehicle signal priority for transit deployment) in the northeastern Illinois case study. In the report, they provided the detailed explanations for IDAS’s methodologies for ITS benefits, IDAS’s parameter settings and the process for modeling ITS deployments in IDAS. In addition, they summarized several technical issues and recommendations found during their study.
This study aims to assess the feasibility of the IDAS program for evaluating ITS deployments. The assessment of the feasibility of IDAS was conducted in two fold. Firstly, a survey on the IDAS usage among the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) was conducted. The MPOs were selected since they are the main user group of the IDAS program. Secondly, a case study using an actual transportation planning model was conducted. The purpose of the case study was to test the feasibility of IDAS by examining the effects of combining multiple ITS elements into a single ITS deployment (a.k.a., ITS options according to the definition of the IDAS manual) in terms of changes in the relevant benefits and costs. For the case study, the following steps were implemented: i) selecting a site for the case study, ii) importing a transportation planning model into IDAS, iii) building various ITS options, and iv) evaluating these options via IDAS. In addition to the real world network used in the case study, a manageable simple test network was also utilized to further investigate a few issues identified during the case study evaluation.
IDAS is a sketch-level ITS analysis tool that is designed to measure various ITS benefits and costs based on transportation planning model and three major resources – default ITS impact settings, the IDAS Equipment Database Spreadsheet, and the ITS Library for benefit measures (3). These three resources are the results of several years’ efforts by IDAS developers on in-depth studies of the ITS deployments in the US.
The IDAS program consists of five analysis modules:
· An Input/Output Interface Module (IOM),
· An Alternative Generator Module (AGM),
· A Benefit Module,
· A Cost Module, and
· An Alternative Comparison Module (ACM).
The IOM supports importing a transportation planning model, which usually consists of node data (node number and its coordination), link data (from node, to node, distance, capacity, the number of lanes, speed and district information, mode information, area information, and so on), zone data and trip tables. The benefit module includes four submodules – the travel time/throughput submodule, emission submodule, energy submodule, safety submodule and travel time reliability submodule. Each submodule quantifies the resulting benefits from various ITS deployments using imported transportation planning model, ITS impact settings and ITS library. The cost module is used to determine the cost for various ITS elements based on the IDAS Equipment Database Spreadsheet. The ACM conducts benefit/cost analysis and risk analysis for selected ITS options based on results from the benefits module and the cost module (3).
The results of the IDAS analysis can be summarized with three major categories: annual benefits, annual costs and benefit cost comparison as shown below:
· Annual Benefits
- Change in User Mobility,
- Change In User Travel Time,
- Change in Costs Paid by Users,
- Change in External Costs,
- Change in Public Agencies Costs, and
- Other Calculated Benefits.
· Annual Costs
- Average Annual Private Sector Cost, and
- Average Annual Public Sector Cost.
· Benefit/Cost Comparison
- Net Benefit (Annual Benefit - Annual Cost), and
- B/C Ratio (Annual Benefit/Annual Cost).
The above values are provided in 1995 dollars based on selected discount and inflation rates.[2] In addition, IDAS produces performance summary such as vehicle miles of travel, vehicle hours of travel, accidents and emissions for control alternative (baseline without any ITS options) and ITS option (improvement from selected ITS option) and their differences.[3]
The IDAS program was developed under the technical guidance from a committee comprised of representatives from a variety of MPOs. Thus, it is logical to conduct a survey on the IDAS program from MPO staff. In order to conduct an online survey, the email addresses of MPO staff who are in charge of either ITS or transportation planning were obtained from the official Website of Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (AMPO)[4]. A total of 291 contacts were gathered and an on-line survey (see the Appendix A) was sent to these addresses using a commercial survey Website[5].
The survey consists of three parts of questionnaires. The first part asks the awareness of IDAS in “Yes” or “No” answer. When the response is “No”, the survey is ended. If the response were “Yes”, then the user was further inquired of the second part of the survey asking the usage of the IDAS. Again, when the answer is “No”, the survey is ended. When the answer is “Yes”, the main questionnaire was surveyed. The third part of the survey included the feasibility of IDAS. The questionnaire used in the survey is attached in Appendix A.
A total of 76 MPO staff responded on the survey. Table 1 summarizes the responses to the first two questions about awareness and experience of using IDAS.
Table 1. Responses of Awareness and Experience of Using IDAS
|
Survey Question |
Answer |
Response |
|
Are
you aware of ITS Evaluation Tool called IDAS (ITS Deployment Analysis
System)? |
Yes |
33 (43%) |
|
No |
43 (57%) |
|
|
Have you or your agency ever used IDAS (ITS Deployment Analysis System) in any projects? |
Yes |
8
(24%) |
|
No |
25 (76%) |
Table 2 summarizes the opinions of the IDAS program usage from the eight those who stated they have used the IDAS program. It is noted that the response rate means the percentage of people who selected the answer, out of the number of people who answered that question. For example, 100% at the sixth row of the third column under response rate in Table 2 indicates that seven people answered this question out of eight people and all seven people selected the answer.
Table 2. Responses about Usage of IDAS
|
Question |
Answer |
Response |
Response Rate |
|
What was the purpose of using IDAS in the project? (Check all that apply) |
Screening ITS alternatives |
5 |
71% |
|
Prioritizing ITS alternatives |
4 |
57% |
|
|
Estimating life-cycle costs of ITS alternatives |
3 |
43% |
|
|
Scheduling ITS deployment |
3 |
43% |
|
|
Estimating emissions from ITS deployment |
2 |
43% |
|
|
Which of the following ITS elements from the IDAS have you used in the project? (Check all that apply) |
Arterial Traffic Management Systems |
7 |
100% |
|
Freeway Management Systems |
4 |
57% |
|
|
Advanced Public Transit Systems |
4 |
57% |
|
|
Incident Management Systems |
6 |
86% |
|
|
Electronic Payment Systems |
1 |
14% |
|
|
Railroad Grade Crossing Monitors |
1 |
14% |
|
|
Emergency Management Services |
2 |
29% |
|
|
Regional Multimodal Traveler Information Systems |
1 |
14% |
|
|
Commercial Vehicle Operations |
1 |
14% |
|
|
Advanced Vehicle Control and Safety Systems |
1 |
14% |
|
|
Supporting Deployments |
1 |
14% |
|
|
Generic Deployments |
1 |
14% |
|
|
Would you recommend an improvement in any of the following functions of IDAS? (Check all that apply) |
Upgrade Input/Output Interface Module |
4 |
57% |
|
Upgrade default values in the Cost and Benefit Modules |
5 |
71% |
|
|
Upgrade
default values in the Alternative Comparison Module |
4 |
57% |
|
|
Elaborate
ITS Impact Methodologies |
6 |
86% |
|
|
Incorporate emission factors based on MOBILE 6 |
5 |
71% |
It is found that screening ITS alternatives was the most popular purpose of using IDAS and it was followed by prioritizing ITS alternatives. The most frequently used ITS elements in IDAS was Arterial Traffic Management Systems and the second was Incident Management Systems. In the future upgrade desired by respondents, elaborating ITS Impact Methodologies was dominant and followed by upgrading default values in the Cost and Benefit Modules and incorporating emission factors based on MOBILE 6. The confidence on the IDAS results was surveyed and summarized in Table 3.
Table 3. Confidence on IDAS Results
|
Questions |
Answers |
Number of Responses (Response Rates) |
||||
|
Outstanding |
Excellent |
Good |
Average |
Poor |
||
|
How confident were you about the results of the following alternative comparison analyses, if you had used? |
Changes in User Mobility and Travel Time |
1 (14%) |
1 (14%) |
4 (57%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
|
Changes in User Costs (including accident cost) |
0 (0%) |
4 (50%) |
2 (25%) |
2 (25%) |
0 (0%) |
|
|
Emissions |
0 (0%) |
2 (29%) |
1 (14%) |
2 (29%) |
1 (14%) |
|
|
Average Annual Costs of ITS Alternatives |
1 (14%) |
2 (29%) |
3 (43%) |
1 (14%) |
0 (0%) |
|
In Table 3, respondents seem to be quite confident on the IDAS results. All responses except for emissions have better than average rate. In the case of emissions, the half of respondents selected average or poor. According to Megan (4), MOBILE 6 generally estimates higher emissions for past years and lower emissions for future years when compared to those of MOBILE 5. This is because MOBILE 6 was developed under more elaborated and acceptable methods than MOBILE 5 and it considers recent technical improvements related to making vehicle and fuel. Furthermore, since IDAS is usually used to evaluate future ITS deployments, the respondents seems to utilize more accurate emission rates based on MOBILE 6 rather than the current MOBILE 5 (See Table 2 for desired future updates in IDAS).
As shown in Figure 1, Hampton Roads, Virginia, is compromised of the independent communities including Chesapeake, Franklin, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg, and the Counties of Gloucester, Isle of Wight, James City, Southampton, Surry, and York. Total population of Hampton Roads is 1,574,801 people in 2000 (the nation’s 31st largest metropolitan area ranked by population).[6] Norfolk is famous for the home of naval vessels. There are three waterfront Marine Terminals (Virginia International Terminal, Newport News Marine Terminal and Portsmouth Marine Terminal) in Hampton Roads area. Furthermore, Virginia Beach and Williamsburg are well known the nation’s tourist attractions.
Figure 1. Location of Hampton Roads Area
(Source: www.mapquest.com)
The Hampton Roads Planning District Commission (HRPDC) serves as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for Hampton Roads area. Hampton Roads agencies realized the need for ITS in order to support the region’s growth and the quality of life. As a result of that, the HRPDC established the Hampton Roads regional long-range ITS plan, COMPARE (COngestion management Plan: A Regional Effort) in 1995 and then updated it in May 2000. The COMPARE included the ITS long-range plan for the region that can be incorporated with the regional long-range transportation plan (5).
Hampton Roads area has recently introduced various ITS elements, especially those for managing traffic congestion. The major feature of the ITS deployments is the connection among agencies’ individual systems to enhance the efficiency and service of the deployment according to geographical necessary. The major ITS deployments are the follows (5):
· The Hampton Roads Smart Traffic Center,
· The VDOT Suffolk District Smart Traffic Center,
· Transportation Operation Center (TOC) in the City of Norfolk,
· Freeway Incident Management System,
· Dynamic Message Sing on city arterial approaching the interstates,
· A Cellular phone freeway incident call-in system (#77),
· Phase 1 of the freeway Transportation Management System (TMS) on for portion of I-64, I-264, and I-564 in Norfolk, and
· Electronic toll collection on the Coleman Bridge.
According to COMAPRE, the ITS deployment plan can be divided into short-term (0 to 5 years) and long-term (6 to 20 years) plans as mentioned Table 4 (5). It should be noted that the category for ITS User Services follows the definition of Virginia DOT user Services.
Table 4. List of Priority User Services
|
User Services |
Short Term |
Long Term |
|
System Management |
· Traffic Control and Management · Incident Management · Regulatory Functions · Emergency Management · Administrative Functions and Asset Management · Public Transit Management · Demand management |
· None recommended |
|
Personal Travel |
· Pre-trip Traveler Information · En-route Driver Information · Ride Matching and Reservation · Electronic Payment System |
· Route Guidance · Traveler Service Information · Emergency Notification and Personal Security |
|
Commercial Vehicle Operation |
· Commercial Vehicle Electronic Clearance · Commercial Vehicle Administrative Processes |
· Automatic Roadside Safety Inspection · Intermodal Connections |
|
Advanced Vehicle Control and Safety Systems |
· None recommended |
·
Automated Highway System |
After considering current ITS deployments in Hampton Roads area and the User Services in the above table, the four User Services (six ITS elements) are selected for modeling in IDAS for the case study.[7] Table 5 listed the selected User Services and related ITS elements in IDAS.
Table 5. Selected User Services and ITS Elements
|
User Services |
ITS Elements |
Type |
|
Traffic Control and Management |
- Central Control Signal Coordination |
Arterial Traffic Management Systems |
|
Incident Management |
- Incident Detection/Verification /Response/Management combined |
Incident Management Systems |
|
Pre-trip Traveler Information |
- Telephone-based Traveler Information System - Web/Internet-based Traveler Information Systems |
Regional Multimodal Traveler Information Systems |
|
En-route Driver Information |
- Highway Advisory Radio - Freeway Dynamic Message Sign |
Regional Multimodal Traveler Information Systems |
Central Control Signal Coordination is part of the Arterial Traffic Management Systems in IDAS and used to measure the effects of coordinated and actuated signals controlled by traffic management center such as the Transportation Operation Center (TOC) in the City of Norfolk. In order to deploy this ITS element, three parameters are required: i) variability of travel time, ii) overall level of congestion, and iii) time interval between signal timing plan modifications. According to selected parameter values, IDAS determines the increase in the capacity. Here, 11 % of capacity increase was selected based on the following parameters.
· Travel time variability: Predictable,
· Average congestion: Heavy (v/c > 0.9), and
· Time interval between signal timing plan modifications: Average impact (>2 years).
Based on the selected parameter settings, IDAS conducts trip assignment, mode choice and temporal choice (if the transportation planning model includes peak-hour demand) for control alternative, this constitutes baseline case (or control alternative), and then IDAS increases the capacities of selected links belonging to this ITS element, and then conducts again the first step (trip assignment, mode choice and temporal choice) to make a improvement case (or ITS option). Finally the differences between the baseline and improvement can be quantified as related benefits. Among available benefits (change in user mobility, change in user travel time, fuel consumption, emission, accident and other benefits) to this ITS element, the change in user mobility is calculated based on the concept of “consumer surplus.” According to the IDAS manual, it is calculated as follows:
B = (Cb – Ci) (Tb + Ti)/2 (1)
Where, Cb and Ci are the cost per trip and Tb and Ti are the number of trips in the baseline case and improvement case. For each market sector analyzed, these are calculated for each zone pair and then summed over all zone pairs.[8]
The ITS element of Incident Detection/Verification/Response/Management combined is selected from three types of incident management systems available in IDAS. This ITS element requires four parameters shown below. It is noted that default parameter values are used in this study.
· Change in incident duration: 55%,
· Change in emissions: 42%,
· Change in fuel use: 42%,
· Change in fatality rate: 10%,
IDAS provides the change in travel time reliability and change in accident costs as benefits. In order to calculate travel time reliability, IDAS uses the following steps:
· Calculate travel time reliability for all vehicles for baseline case using Vehicle-Hours in Incident Delay per Mile Vehicle table (See Table 12),
· Reduce incident duration by 55%, and
· Recalculate the travel time reliability for the impacted links in the ITS option using the revised incident duration value.
Highway Advisory Radio is a type of Regional Multimodal Traveler Information Systems. This ITS option requires three parameters as the follows:
· Percent vehicle that tune to broadcast: 25%,
· Percent vehicle hearing broadcast that save time: 25%,
· Percent time that extreme traffic condition are occurring: 10%, and
· Average amount of time saved by each traveler saving time under extreme traffic condition: 4 minutes.
Based on the above parameter settings, for each HAR-equipped link IDAS calculated estimate of person-hour saved as a result of HAR installed using the following equation:
[Person-hour
saved] = [traffic volume] ´
[HAR usage percentage] ´ (2)
[Percent time that extreme traffic condition are occurring] ´
[Average amount of time saved in hour]
This calculated person-hour saved is provided in the column of change in User mobility of ACM.
DMS follows a similar process as that of HAR. This ITS option requires three parameters as the follows:
· Percent time sign is turned on and is disseminating information that can be used to save travel time: 10%,
· Percent vehicle passing sign that save time: 20%, and
· Average amount of time saved by each traveler saving time: 3 minutes.
Based on the above parameter settings, for each DMS-equipped link, IDAS calculates estimated person-hour saved using the following equation
[Person-hour saved] = [Traffic volume] ´
[Percent time sign is turned on] ´ (3)
[Percent vehicle passing sign that save time] ´
[Average amount of time saved in hour]
This calculated person-hour saved is provided in the column of change in User mobility of ACM.
Telephone-based Traveler Information System belongs to the Regional Multimodal Traveler Information Systems. This ITS option produces only changes in user mobility as an annual benefit based on the following two parameter settings:
· Market penetration: 1%, and
· Maximum amount of time saved by each traveler saving time: 15% of in-coverage delay time.
Here, in-coverage delay time means that the difference between the loaded travel time and the free-flow travel time + the incident delay from travel time reliability submodule for all links affected by this ITS option. IDAS calculates the avoided delay from this ITS option using the following equation for each O-D pair and then sums up the avoided delay across all O-D pairs.
[Avoided
delay] = [O-D trips] ´
[Market penetration] ´ (4)
[In-coverage delay time] ´
[Maximum delay saving]
This calculated person-hour saved is provided in the column of change in User mobility of ACM.
Web/Internet-based Traveler Information System follows a similar process as that of Telephone-based Traveler Information Systems in terms of methodology and process for calculating related benefits. This ITS option also calculates only the change in user mobility as an annual benefit based on the following two parameter settings:
· Market penetration: 5%, and
· Maximum amount of time saved by each traveler saving time: 20% of in-coverage delay time.
This calculated person-hour saved is provided in the column of change in User mobility of ACM.
IDAS prepares the setting for running the IDAS Benefits Module. Based on selected settings, IDAS produces relevant benefits. This study used the settings recommended in the IDAS manual as shown in Table 6. However, Mode Choice, Temporal Choice and Induced/Foregone Demand in the application of Central Control Signal Coordination were excluded because the results of the IDAS running with these three settings showed negative benefits caused from huge induced demands. No further attempts were made to adjust these three parameters.
Table 6. Selected Settings for IDAS Benefits Analysis
|
ITS Option |
Trip Assignment |
Mode Choice |
Temporal Choice |
Induced/Foregone Demand |
Emissions |
Safety |
Energy |
Travel Time Reliability |
|
Central Control Signal Coordination |
O |
|
|
|
O |
O |
O |
O |
|
Freeway Incident Detection/Verification/Response/Management Combination |
|
|
|
|
|
O |
|
O |
|
HAR |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DMS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Telephone-Based TIS |
O |
|
|
|
|
O |
|
O |
|
Web/Internet-Based TIS |
O |
|
|
|
|
O |
|
O |
In this study, a transportation planning model for year 2005 developed and maintained by the HRPDC was used. The original transportation planning model consists of six elements:
· Zone to district equivalence information,
· Node information,
· Link information,
· Trip matrix information for auto trip,
· In-vehicle time information for auto trip, and
· Trip matrix information for bus trip.
Among the above elements, the trip matrix information for bus trip was not used because the scope of this project was confined into ITS elements related to only auto trip.
These six ITS options as mentioned in Section 4.3 and their combinations were used to examine the IDAS feasibility on evaluating ITS benefits and costs.[9] The years of opening and mid-point of construction of all ITS options are assumed to be 2005 based on the model year of the transportation planning model. The combinations of the six ITS options were prepared to examine the effects of combining the multiple ITS elements into a single ITS deployment (or ITS options in the IDAS definition) in terms of changes in relevant benefits and costs. In addition, the functionality of equipment sharing settings in IDAS was also tested. First, the six ITS options consisted of six individual ITS element, with the transportation models, parameter settings as mentioned in Section 4.3 was tested. Each ITS option is assumed to be installed on the following links:[10], [11]
· Central Control Signal Coordination: major arterial links
· Incident Detection/Verification/Response/Management combined: freeway links
· Telephone-based Traveler Information System: major arterial and freeway links
· Web/Internet-based Traveler Information Systems: major arterial and freeway links
· Highway Advisory Radio: freeway links
· Freeway Dynamic Message Sign: freeway links
Table 7 summaries the results of IDAS for the six selected ITS options. It is noted that the monetary values are reported in 1995 dollar.
Table 7. Summary of Benefits and Costs for Six ITS Options
|
Benefits
and Costs |
ITS
Option |
|||||||||
|
Signal |
Telephone |
Internet |
Incident |
HAR |
DMS |
|||||
|
Annual Benefits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Change in User Mobility |
$ |
0 |
2,775,171,850 |
18,501,116,273 |
0 |
706,616 |
8,844,007 |
||
|
|
Change In User Travel Time |
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
In-Vehicle Travel Time |
$ |
12,031,797,804 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
Out-of-Vehicle Travel Time |
$ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
Travel Time Reliability |
$ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
26,365 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
Change in Costs Paid by Users |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
Fuel Costs |
$ |
-3,329,262 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
Non-fuel Operating Costs |
$ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
Accident Costs (Internal Only) |
$ |
926,185 |
0 |
0 |
4,121,149 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
Change in External Costs |
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
Accident Costs (External Only) |
$ |
163,440 |
0 |
0 |
727,260 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
Emissions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HC/ROG |
$ |
1,789,133 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
NOx |
$ |
322,420 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
CO |
$ |
20,814,540 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
PM10 |
$ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
CO2 |
$ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
Global Warming |
$ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
Noise |
$ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
Other Mileage-Based External
Costs |
$ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
Other Trip-Based External Costs |
$ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
Change in Public Agencies Costs
(Efficiency Induced) |
$ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
|
Other Calculated Benefits |
$ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
|
User Defined Additional
Benefits |
$ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
|
Total Annual Benefits |
$ |
12,052,484,260 |
2,775,171,850 |
18,501,116,273 |
4,874,774 |
706,616 |
8,844,007 |
||
|
Annual Costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Average Annual Private Sector
Cost |
$ |
0 |
305,821 |
305,821 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
|
Average Annual Public Sector
Cost |
$ |
1,368,592 |
219,276 |
512,055 |
1,046,064 |
158,847 |
1,169,572 |
||
|
|
Total Annual Cost |
$ |
1,368,592 |
525,097 |
817,876 |
1,046,064 |
158,847 |
1,169,572 |
||
|
Benefit/Cost Comparison |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||