Transportation Models
Transportation Models
This chapter begins, in Sect. 2.1, with a brief overview of the use of models in the
transportation sector, several types of models used in transportation planning, and the
specific evaluation methods used. Thereafter, the theory of traffic flow is introduced
which enables investigation of the dynamic properties of traffic on road sections with
regard to the respective variables defined at each point in space and time. Based on
the mathematical equations derived, different transportation system scenarios are
investigated in Sect. 2.2. Section 2.3 examines queuing theory, the mathematical
study of waiting in lines or queues. Transportation system models incorporate
queuing theory to predict, for example, queuing lengths and waiting times. Section 2.4
analyzes transportation systems with regard to existing demand and the potential
impact of changes resulting from transportation planning and development projects.
Traffic management has become a critical issue as the number of vehicles in
metropolitan areas is nearing the existing road capacity, resulting in traffic
congestion. In some areas, the volume of vehicles has met and/or exceeded road
capacity. The methodological background of congestion is described in Sect. 2.5.
Graph theory is introduced in Sect. 2.6. It is widely used to model and study
transportation networks. Section 2.7 focuses on shortages occurring in transportation
systems, so-called bottlenecks. The main consequence of a bottleneck is an immedi-
ate reduction in the capacity of the transportation system infrastructure. Section 2.8
describes a ProModel-based case study for a four-arm road intersection. Section 2.9
contains comprehensive questions from the transportation model area of concentra-
tion, and the final section includes references and suggestions for further reading.
2.1 Introduction
1. Trip generation: this approach predicts the total trips that start and end in a
particular area of interest, the traffic analysis zone (TAZ), based on factors such
as the zones land use patterns; number of residents and jobs; demographic
factors; transportation system features, such as number of roads, quality of
transit service, etc.; and the distance between two zones.
2. Trip distribution: this approach focuses on trips that are distributed between
pairs of zones, based on the distance between them.
3. Mode split: this approach focuses on trips that are allocated among the available
travel modes.
4. Route assignment: this approach focuses on trips that are assigned to specific
facilities included in the highway and transit transportation networks.
These models make use of travel surveys and census data to determine transpor-
tation demands, establish baseline conditions, and identify future trends. The trips
used as a basis in these models are often predicted separately by purpose, i.e., work,
shopping, etc., and thereafter aggregated into total trips on the respective network.
This modeling approach allows the prediction of congestion problems because they
mainly focus on measures of peak-period motor vehicle trips on major roadways.
As a result of these predictions, a so-called level-of-service (LOS) roadway report is
available with a letter grade from A (best) to F (worst) which indicates vehicle
traffic speed and delay. As mentioned in TRB (2007), these models often incorpo-
rate several types of bias favoring automobile transport over other modes and
undervaluing travel demand model (TDM) strategies. Because the travel surveys
they are based on tend to ignore or undercount nonmotorized travel, they under-
value nonmotorized transportation improvements for achieving transportation
planning objectives (Stopher and Greaves 2007). Moreover, they do not accurately
account for the tendency of traffic to maintain equilibrium and the effects of traffic
generated by roadway capacity expansion, thereby exaggerating future congestion
problems and the benefits of roadway capacity expansion.
A number of recent studies have examined ways to better predict how smart
growth locations and demand management programs can affect trip and parking
48 2 Transportation Models
generation (Lee et al. 2012). Based on the assumption that a standard application of
trip rates for an area with many smart growth characteristics will result in an
overestimation of the number of trips generated, this study identifies eight available
methodologies, five of which are candidate methods which are compared with
the traditional trip generation method in a two-part assessment.
Economic models are used to evaluate and compare the value of particular
transportation improvements, such as widening a roadway, improving public tran-
sit, or implementing a TDM strategy. The models compare the various categories of
benefits and costs. They tend to consider a relatively limited set of benefits, since
most of these models were originally developed to evaluate roadway improvement
options. They generally assume that total vehicle mileage is constant and so is not
well designed to evaluate the full benefits of TDM strategies that reduce automobile
trips. For example, these models often ignore parking and vehicle ownership cost
savings that result when travelers shift from automobile travel to alternative modes;
and they generally ignore the safety benefits that result from reductions in total
vehicle mileage (Ellis et al. 2012).
Integrated Transportation and Land Use Models are designed to predict how
transportation improvements will affect land use patterns, e.g., the location and type
of development that will occur if a highway or transit service is improved. They are
often integrated with traffic models. These are considered the best tools for
evaluating transportation policies and programs because they can measure accessi-
bility rather than just mobility, but they are costly to develop, are complex, and may
be difficult to apply, particularly for evaluating individual, small-scale projects
(Dong et al. 2006). Some models predict how particular land use factors, such as
density and mix, affect travel behavior and their impacts on congestion and
pollution emissions (Donoso et al. 2006; Scheurer et al. 2009; Bartholomew and
Ewing 2009). The Smart Growth Area Planning (SmartGAP) tool synthesizes
households and firms in a region and determines their travel demand characteristics
based on their built environment and transportation policies affecting their travel
behavior (TRB 2012).
Transportation simulation models are a newer approach to modeling the behav-
ior and needs of individual transport users (so-called agents), rather than aggregate
groups. This improves the consideration of modes such as walking and cycling; the
transport demands of nondrivers, cyclists, and the disabled; and the effects of
factors such as parking supply and price, transit service quality, and local land
use. Simulation models can provide a bridge between other types of models, since
they can incorporate elements from the conventional traffic, economic, and land use
models. Simulation models have been used for many years in individual projects
and are increasingly used for area-wide analysis. Transportation simulation models
allow traffic flow and network flow aspects to be combined for investigation of
transportation systems with continuous services, such as road systems and trans-
portation systems with discrete services, such as airplanes, buses, ships, and trains.
To conclude, the biases in current models tend to exaggerate the benefits
of roadway capacity expansion and understate the value of alternative modes and
TDM solutions. More accurate and comprehensive modeling is, therefore, a key
2.2 Traffic Flow Models 49
The theory of traffic flow investigates the dynamic properties of traffic on road
sections. Dynamic models of traffic flow date from the 1950s, representing traffic
flow based on an analogy with lines of water flows in rivers, an approach that allows
to treat individual vehicles as continuous fluid. Against this background, macro-
scopic traffic flow theory relates on variables declaring the dynamic properties of
traffic which are:
Density k
Flow rate q
Speed v
These result in the fundamental statement that flow q equals density k multiplied
by speed v. These variables are defined at each point in space and time which means
that the discrete nature of traffic is transferred into continuous variables. The
evolution in time of these state variables can be modeled by partial differential
equations (PDEs) comprising the conservation of mass (vehicles) and an experi-
mental relation between flow rate q and density k. Using this approach, traffic flow
models can be formulated for density k by the number of vehicles n at time t0
occupying a given length x of a road or, more in general, on the location interval x
of a roadway at a particular instant, as follows:
n
k : 2:1
x
The total space s of the n vehicles can be set equal to x, and thus we can write
n 1
kX , 2:2
si s
i
1X
s si : 2:3
n n
50 2 Transportation Models
From (2.3), it can be seen that density k depends on the designated roadway point
x0, the time t0, and the measurement interval, defined as an area in the t-x space.
As introduced in Immers and Logghe (2002), for a location x1, we can take the
center of the measurement interval x. Thus, (2.1) can be rewritten in order to
include these factors:
n
kx1 ; t1 ; s1 : 2:4
x
For uncongested traffic conditions, freeway traffic data suggests that desired
speeds are relatively constant and chosen by the drivers. Under stationary
conditions, the flow-rate-versus-density ratio can be expressed as mean speed v,
which appears to be nearly constant for uncongested traffic flow. Introducing the
flow-rate-versus-density ratio under congested conditions causes driver behavior to
become an important factor. Assuming drivers can no longer choose free-flow
speed under congestion, a simple classification can define driver types: aggressive
drivers TAD and nonaggressive drivers TNAD. Assuming that each driver type drives
at his/her desired speed, the uncongested flow-rate-versus-density relationship is a
weighted average of the desired speeds. With regard to such behavior, a regression
of traffic flow on total density interacts with proportions of distinct driver/vehicle
types TI with I AD or I NAD. This results in estimates of free-flow speeds for these
drivers, described for the uncongested flow rate by the following equation
(Kockelman 2001):
X
qu vfree, T I pT I k, 2:5
TI
where qu is the total uncongested traffic flow rate, vfree, T I is the free traffic flow speed
of driver/vehicle type TI, pT I k is the density of driver/vehicle type TI, and pT I is the
proportion of vehicles on the road of driver/vehicles type TI.
In the case of a congested condition, the driving situation is different because speed
is no longer constant for tumescent densities. Drivers can no longer choose free-
flow speeds because they have to be aware of the spacing at which they follow the
car in front of them. For this situation, the behavioral assumption is of selected
spacing d as a linear function of congested speed vC. Since total vehicle density k is
the inverse of average spacing of vehicles on the roadway and average spacing is a
2.2 Traffic Flow Models 51
proportion-weighted sum of type densities, one can solve for the total density kT as a
function of speed as shown in the following equation from Kockelman (2001):
1 1
kT X X , 2:6
pT I d T I pT I aT I bT I v
TI TI
where d T I stands for intervehicle spacing (front-to-front) of the Ith driver type, v is
mean speed, and aT I and bT I are constants defining the Ith driver type behavior.
Based on the foregoing specifications and definitions, the following graphs can be
introduced (Muench 2004), showing the congested and uncongested flow rate q
versus density k (Fig. 2.1) and the speed v versus flow rate q (Fig. 2.2). As indicated
in Fig. 2.1, the optimal traffic flow capacity qm correlates with the inflection point km
at which the uncongested flow rate changes into the congested flow rate, meaning the
more density k increases, the more traffic flow q decreases, which can be expressed
by the equation of flow rate q with vf as free space mean speed shown in Fig. 2.1.
In Fig. 2.2, it is shown that the optimal traffic flow capacity qm correlates with
the inflection point vm at which the uncongested free-flow speed changes into
the congested flow speed. In other words, the more the flow rate q increases, the
more the mean speed v decreases, which results in the equation of flow rate q with vf
as free space mean speed shown in Fig. 2.2.
Flow rate q is the interaction of density k and mean speed (stationary traffic
conditions) u. Thus, flow rate q represents the number of vehicles n passing some
designated roadway point x0 in a given time interval t. For time interval t at any
location x, such as measurement interval S, flow rate q be calculated as follows:
n
qx; t; S : 2:7
t
The time interval t is the sum of headways h between vehicles as their bumpers
pass a given point x0:
X
n
t hi : 2:8
i1
Introducing a mean headway h, we find the following expression for the traffic
flow rate q:
n 1
qu X
n : 2:9
h
hi
i1
Mean speed v is the quotient of flow rate q and density k. Mean speed is a function
of location x, time interval t, and measurement interval S which results in:
qx; t; S
vx; t; S : 2:10
kx; t; S
In another form, this definition of mean speed is also called the fundamental
relation of traffic flow theory:
q k v, 2:11
This relation links flow rate q, density k, and mean speed v. Knowing two of
these variables immediately leads to the remaining third variable.
2.2 Traffic Flow Models 53
Based on the mathematical equations above, we can work out some traffic scenarios
as case study examples.
Scenario 1
Problem: Let us assume that a vehicle is traveling in uncongested conditions for a
total distance D of 100 miles. For the first 60 miles of this distance D1, the vehicle
travels v1 55 mph; and for the next 40 miles D2 of the total distance, it travels
v2 65 mph. For this scenario, the weighted average speed over the time spent
traveling those 100 miles is of interest to know.
Solution: Intuitively, driving at 55 mph will take longer than driving at 65 mph.
Hence, the weighted average speed vwa for the entire trip is less than the arithmetic
mean speed vam of 60 mph. Thus, we will demonstrate that this is true by the
following calculations:
t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 533 min
ta 106:6 min:
5veh 5veh
Table 2.1 Driving time Vehicle Time required to drive 100 miles
for a given distance by
1 t1 80 min
different driver types
2 t2 100 min
3 t3 133 min
4 t4 120 min
5 t5 100 min
54 2 Transportation Models
Now we can calculate the average speed va based on the average travel time ta
X
n
t hi :
i1
v 20 veh veh
k 20 :
x 1 mile mile
Calculating space mean speed has to take into account that space mean speed of
vehicles moving along and traversing a roadway segment of a known length l
follows (2.11) assuming v is space mean speed:
Now we can calculate the space headway hS and the time headway hT.
Space headway hS can be calculated in an idealized manner taking into account
the result for density k as follows:
1
k
hi
1 1
hi veh
0:025 mile:
k 40 mile
2.2 Traffic Flow Models 55
hS v hT ,
hS 0:025mile
hT 1:5 s:
v 60 mile
h
1 X
oR x; t; S n o: 2:12
t
Assuming all vehicles have the same length lV, then the relative occupancy oR
and density k can be given as follows (Immers and Logghe 2002):
oR x; t; S lV kx; t; S: 2:13
Scenario 4
Problem: Let a traffic stream have a mean speed v of 50 mph and a flow rate q
of 1,000 vehicles/h. All vehicles are assumed to be 5 m in length lV. What is the
relative occupancy?
Solution: From (2.11) we receive
mile vehicles
oR x; t; S lV k 0:005 km 0:62137 20 6:21 %:
km mile
It should be noted that this formula cannot be used in real-world applications
because a traffic stream is neither homogeneous nor stationary in reality. A possible
solution calculating traffic density is to measure the traffic flow rate and traffic mean
speed using the equations given in Immers and Logghe (2002) and then calculate
traffic density by using the fundamental relation of traffic flow theory in (2.11).
56 2 Transportation Models
With regard to the level of detail the models use to represent the traffic flow
behavior, the models can be classified, as introduced in Chap. 1: macroscale as
macroscopic traffic flow models, representing the traffic behavior at an aggregated
level; microscale as microscopic traffic flow models, representing the movement
of individual vehicles; and mesoscale models representing traffic flow at the level
of detail of a single vehicle.
Macroscopic traffic flow models can be described as:
Space continuous models: where state variables are defined at each point in space
Space discrete models: where basic variables affecting link performance, such
as density or speed, do not vary along the link
With regard to the control flow in the macroscale model, there is no consider-
ation of detailed individual transportation units. Using the fundamental relation of
traffic flow theory in (2.11) to describe the changes in time and location of the
macroscopic variables along a road:
Let the road to be modeled be divided into cells with length x, and the density
of cell i at time tj is represented by k(i,j); then the number of vehicles in cell i is
k(i,j).dx. Then, one time interval t later, at tj + 1, density will change. Let us
assume that a number n of vehicles have traveled from cell i-l into cell i which
results in a traffic inflow of
qi 1, j t, 2:15
and a number n of vehicles have traveled from cell i to cell i + l which results in
the traffic outflow
qi; j t: 2:16
Let us also assume there are branching and exit roads which will enable in- and
outflows in the form of
zi; j x t, 2:17
where z is expressed per time and length of unit and is positive for an increase in the
number n of vehicles.
Let the limit for time step t and cell length x approach zero, and we can write
the partial differential equation representing the conservation law of traffic as
follows:
2.3 Queuing Models 57
kx; t qx; t
zx; t : 2:18
t x
Let the traffic flow be stochastic. This requires a stochastic model because the
variables of the traffic flow cannot be described as a deterministic process but could
be described as a stochastic process:
Let arrivals and services be independent, randomly distributed variables with time
constant parameters. Let N be a random variable describing the queue length and
n realizations of N. Let the queuing phenomena be defined by the following notation:
A=B=cd; e
where A denotes the type of arrival pattern variable describing time intervals
between two successive arrivals, B denotes the type of service pattern, c is the
number of service stations, d is the queue storage limit, and e denotes the queuing
behavior, such as FIFO (First In First Out), LIFO (Last In First Out), etc., where
d and e, if defined by 1 (no constraint on maximum queue length) and by FIFO, are
generally omitted. This representation in traffic flow models allows, with the help of
queuing analysis, to determine how long it takes to complete a trip and/or how long
it would have taken if there was no queuing, congestion, etc., which refers to the
topic of Sect. 2.3, Queuing Models.
dealt with properly, queues can result in severe network congestion or gridlock
conditions, therefore making them important to be studied and understood by
engineers. For example, based on the departure and arrival pair data, the delay of
every individual vehicle can be determined. Using an input-output queuing dia-
gram, it is possible to determine the delay for every individual vehicle: the delay of
the ith vehicle is time of departure-time of arrival (td ta). Thus, the total delay is
the sum of the delays of each vehicle.
Let us assume that the traffic flow q to and through an intersection is controlled by
a traffic light sequencer. This can be accomplished by analyzing the cumulative flow
of vehicles as a function of time. As it is known from traffic flow operation experience
with traffic light sequencing, traffic lights change in the following sequence:
whenever, e.g., a person pushes a button. Let us assume the light is red and
the traffic flow is stopped from time t1 to t2 during the red signal interval. At the
start of the green interval (t2), traffic begins to leave the intersection, with the
so-called saturation traffic flow rate qSat, and continues until the queue is exhausted.
Thereafter, the departure rate D(t) equals the arrival rate A(t) until t3, which is
the beginning of the next red signal. At this point, the process starts all over.
The resulting type of traffic flow is called interrupted flow. Interrupted traffic
flow is a flow regulated by an external means, such as a traffic signal. Under
interrupted traffic flow conditions, vehicle-vehicle interactions and vehicle-
roadway interactions play a secondary role in calculating the traffic flow. For
interrupted traffic flow, the following impacts can be identified:
Determining the optimal cycle length and phase length for traffic lights with
regard to the daytime-dependent numbers of vehicles moving in different
possible directions at the respective crossing
Evaluating consequences, adding lanes, or changing the geometric configuration
of an interstate highway on recurrent (peak period) and nonrecurrent (incident
happens) delays
Optimizing the frequency at which trucks should be dispatched along a route,
taking cost of operation and service quality into account
Contrary to the interrupted traffic flow is the uninterrupted traffic flow which
depends on vehicle-vehicle interactions and interactions between vehicles and the
roadway situation. For example, vehicles traveling on an interstate highway are
moving in an uninterrupted traffic flow so long as no congestion occurs as part of an
accident on the interstate highway.
Thus, the dominant effect of queuing theory in transportation is the delay of a
trip from an initial destination to a final destination, measured as
Time in system
Average speed
Waiting time
2.3 Queuing Models 59
Throughput rate at which vehicles proceed through the highway system, which
means, in terms of transportation, how long a trip will take from the place of
departure to the final destination.
Crowding/congestion is the separation between or density of vehicles, which
means, in terms of transportation, a specific number of cars and/or trucks are
moving in their respective lanes on a highway from the place of departure to the
final destination.
Queue percentage refers to the number of vehicles that encounter a queue prior
to traveling, which means, in terms of transportation, congestion happens where
vehicles have to wait before they can drive on the highway from the place of
congestion to the final destination.
Transportation cost is the annual or per customer expense of providing transpor-
tation service, which means, in terms of transportation, the transportation ticket
bill as part of public transportation from the place of departure to the final
destination.
Productivity of transportation depends on the amount of queuing and whether
the transportation system is saturated, which means, in terms of transportation, a
highway or roadway, which is congested every morning by vehicles commuting
into a metropolitan area and leaving the same way in the evening to go back
home, is saturated for peak traffic. The degree of saturation is:
Under saturated: < .
Saturated: .
Oversaturated: > .
with the following notation:
Arrival rate (vehicles per unit time): .
Departure rate (vehicles per unit number): .
Let the average queue size (measured in vehicles) equal the arrival rate (vehicles
per unit time) multiplied by the average waiting time (both delay time in queue and
activity time (in units of time)); then the result is independent of particular arrival
distributions, which is known as Littles Law (Little and Graves 2008). This law
says that, under steady-state conditions, the average number of vehicles in a
queuing system equals the average rate which vehicles arrive multiplied by the
average time that a vehicle spends in the system. Letting
Fig. 2.3 Number of vehicles in a queuing system versus time (Little and Graves 2008)
L W: 2:19
This equation is remarkably simple, extremely useful, and handy for back in the
envelope calculations. The reason is that two of the terms in (2.19) may be easy to
estimate but not the third. Thus, Littles Law provides the missing value (Little and
Graves 2008).
In Fig. 2.3 we follow an example given in Little and Graves (2008) which shows
a possible realization of a queuing system. With regard to Littles Law, one can
make a heuristic argument interpreting the area under the curve in Fig. 2.3 in two
different ways:
Let
On the one hand, a vehicle in the queuing system is simply there. The number of
items can be counted at any instant of time t to give n(t). Its average value over T is
the integral of n(t) over T, meaning A(T ), divided by T. On the other hand, at time t,
each of the vehicles is waiting and is accumulating waiting time. By integrating
n(t) over the time period T, we obtain a cumulative measure of the waiting time,
again equal to A(T ). Furthermore, the arrivals are countable too and given by N(T).
Therefore, from Fig. 2.3, we can define
2.3 Queuing Models 61
LT T W T : 2:20
from which we get the desired result for (2.19). It is important to note the equation
holds for each realization of the queuing system over time. This was argued by
Little, in his original paper in 1961, noting that (2.19) held for each evolution of the
time series of a particular queuing system (Little and Graves 2008).
Since the key elements of a transportation queuing system are vehicles and arrivals
and/or departures, a queuing system can be described by the following attributes:
Queuing discipline, which is the behavior of the queue in reaction to its current
state
Service mechanism, which means that service times may be constant or of some
random duration.
First come, first served (FCFS) or first in, first out (FIFO): means that customers
(vehicles, passengers, etc.) are served one at a time and that the customer that
has been waiting the longest is served first.
Last come, first serve (LCFS) or last in, first out (LIFO): means it also serves
customers (vehicles, passengers, etc.) one at a time; however, the customer with
the shortest waiting time will be served first.
Sharing: means activity capacity is shared equally between customers (vehicles,
passengers, etc.).
Priority: means customers (vehicles, passengers, etc.) with high priority are
served first. Priority queues can be of two types: non-preemptive (activity in
service cannot be interrupted) and preemptive (activity in service can be
interrupted by a higher priority activity).
Shortest activity first: means the next activity to be served is the one with the
smallest size.
Preemptive shortest activity first: means the next activity to be served is the one
with the original smallest size.
Shortest remaining processing time: means the next activity to be served is the
one with the smallest remaining processing requirement.
Round robin scheduling (RRS): means time slices are assigned to each activity
in equal portions and in circular order, handling them all without priority;
also known as cyclic executive.
Multilevel feedback: means a scheduling algorithm which meets the following
design requirements for multimode systems:
Gives preference to short activities.
Gives preference to I/O bound processes. This means it refers to a condition
in which the time it takes to complete an activity is determined principally by
the period spent waiting for input or output services to be completed.
Separates processes into categories based on their need for services.
Service in random number: means random numbers are generated in a predict-
able fashion using a mathematical formula announcing the sequence of services.
2.3 Queuing Models 63
Scenario 5
Problem: Let a transportation system have the following elements: a calling
population, a waiting line, and services. Let calling population be infinite, i.e., if a
vehicle leaves the calling population and joins the waiting line or enters service, there
is no change in the arrival rate of other vehicles that may need service. Arrivals for
service occur one at a time using a randomized schedule; once they join the waiting
line, they are eventually served. In this transportation model, service times are
assumed to be of some random length according to a probability distribution that
does not change over time. Assume that system capacity has no limit, meaning
that any number of vehicles can wait in line. Furthermore, the vehicles should be
served in the order of their arrival by a single server, which results in the first come,
first served (FCFS) or first in, first out (FIFO) service schedule.
Let arrivals and services be defined by the distribution of the time between
arrivals and the distribution of the service times, respectively. For any simple
transportation queue, the overall effective arrival time has to be less than the total
service rate; otherwise, the waiting line will grow without bounds. If queues grow
without bounds, they are called explosive or unstable. In cases where the arrival
time will be for short terms greater than the service rate, there is a need for queuing
networks with routing capabilities.
Queuing systems can be represented by terms such as state, event, simulation
clock, etc. Hence, the state of the queuing system is represented by its number of
vehicles as well as the state of the activity (server), which can be busy or idle. An
event then represents a set of circumstances that causes an instantaneous change in
the state of the system. There are only two possible events that can affect the state of
the transportation system: the arrival event, which means the entry of a vehicle into
the system, and the departure event, meaning the completion of and activity
(service) on a vehicle. Furthermore, a simulation clock is used to track
simulated time.
Solution: If a vehicle enters a discrete-event transportation system, the vehicle
can find activity (server) either busy or idle, which results in two possible cases:
It is not possible for the server to be idle and the queue to be empty, which can be
interpreted as a third case. The results of which can be expressed in a matrix form
for the potential unit actions upon arrival, as shown in Table 2.2.
After completing a service, as shown in Table 2.2, the server can become idle or
remain busy with the next unit. The relationship of these two outcomes of the state
of the queue is shown in Table 2.3. If the queue is not empty, another unit can enter
the server keeping him busy; or if the queue is empty, the server will be idle after a
service is completed, which is indicated by the disjunctive indication of case 1 or 2.
Again, it is impossible for the server to become busy if the queue is empty when a
service is completed, which is indicated by case 3.
Simulating queuing systems requires the stipulation of an event list for deter-
mining what will be next. This event list tracks the future times at which different
types of events occur. Hence the simulation system is able to calculate the respec-
tive simulation clock time, e.g., for arrivals and departures. If events occur at
random times, the randomness needed can be realized through random numbers.
A random number is a number generated by a process, whose outcome is unpre-
dictable and which cannot be subsequentially reliably reproduced. This definition
works fine provided that one has some kind of a black box that fulfills this task.
Random numbers have the following properties:
When used without specific meaning, the word random usually means random
with uniform distribution. A uniform distribution also known as a rectangular
distribution is a distribution that has constant probability. A transformation which
transforms from a two-dimensional continuous uniform distribution to a
two-dimensional bivariate normal distribution or complex normal distribution is
the Box-Muller transformation which allows pairs of uniform random numbers to
be transformed to corresponding random numbers having a two-dimensional nor-
mal distribution. Random numbers can be generated with the respective queuing
system simulation tools. When generating random numbers over some specified
boundary, it is often necessary to normalize the distributions so that each differen-
tial area is equally populated.
Scenario 6
Problem: Let the transportation system in Scenario 5 have interarrival times and
service times that can be generated from the distribution of random variables.
Consider having seven vehicles with the interarrival times 0, 2, 6, 4, 3, 1,
2. Based on the interarrival times, the arrival times of the seven vehicles in the
queuing systems result in 0, 2, 8, 12, 15, 16, 18.
Solution: Due to these boundaries, the first vehicle arrives at clock time 0, which
sets the simulation clock in operation. The second vehicle arrives two time units
later at clock time 2, the third vehicle arrives six time units later at clock time 8, etc.
The second time values of interest in Scenario 5 are activity (service) times that are
2.3 Queuing Models 65
generated at random from a distribution of activity (service) times. Let the possible
activity (service) times be one, two, three, and four time units. Hence, we are able to
mesh the interarrival times and the activity (service) times, simulating the simple
transportation queuing system.
In this queuing model, the first vehicle arrives at clock time 0 and activity
(service) starts immediately, which requires four time units. The second vehicle
arrived at clock time 2, but activity (service) could not begin until clock time 4. This
occurred because vehicle 1 did not finish activity (service) until clock time 4. The
third vehicle arrives at clock time 8 and is finished at clock time 10, etc. The
strategy that serves vehicles in Scenario 6 is based on the first come, first served
(FCFS) or first in, first out (FIFO) basis, which keeps track of the clock time at
which each event occurs.
Furthermore, the chronological ordering of events can be determined as records
of the clock times of each arrival event and of each departure event, depending on
the vehicle number. The chronological ordering of events is needed as a base
concept for the realization of discrete-event simulation systems.
Open-queuing systems, which have sources and sinks. The jobs pass through the
queuing net and leave it when all demands are satisfied. Typical examples of
open-queuing systems are production lines, where the jobs are the raw materials
that have to be processed using certain operations and leave the system as ready-
made products.
Closed-queuing systems, which are identified by a closed loop in which the jobs
move through the queuing net. The number of jobs is fixed for the whole
simulation time. A typical example of a closed-queuing system is a multiuser
system with n terminals and a single central processing unit (CPU). The jobs
circle between the terminals and the CPU; their number stays constant during the
simulation time.
66 2 Transportation Models
The average waiting time of a vehicle is determined by the total time the vehicles
wait in the queue divided by the total number of vehicles.
The average time a vehicle spends in the queuing system is determined by the
total time the vehicles spend in the queuing system divided by the total number
of vehicles.
The average service time is determined by the total service time divided by the
total number of customers.
The average time between arrivals is determined by the sum of all times between
arrivals divided by the number of arrivals 1.
The probability a vehicle has to wait in the queue is determined by the number of
vehicles who wait in queue divided by the total number of vehicles.
The fraction of idle time of the server is determined by the total idle time of the
server divided by the total runtime of the simulation.
There are measures of performance for queuing systems available, but, with
regard to the complexity of the queuing system investigated, some of which are not
well defined.
Let D be the delay in queue of the ith customer, Wi Di + Si be the waiting time
in system of the ith customer, Q(t) be the number of customers in queue at time t,
and S(t) be the number of customers in system at time t. Then the measures
X
n
Di
i1
d lim
n!1 n
and
X
n
Wi
i1
w lim
n!1 n
2.3 Queuing Models 67
are called steady-state average delay d and steady-state average waiting time w.
Similarly the measures result in
ZT
Qtdt
0
Q lim
T!1 T
and
ZT
Ltdt
0
L lim
T!1 T
and are called steady-state time-average number in queue Q and steady-state time-
average number or queue length L.
The most important equations for queuing systems among others are
Q D,
and
L W: 2:19
These equations hold for every queuing system for which D and W exist.
Equation 2.19 is the Little formula.
Queuing systems offer a standard notation which can hold the following
characteristics:
/swwith sw as service rate of the system when all servers are busyis called
utilization factor of the queuing system. Thus a single-server queuing system with
exponential interarrival times and service times and a FIFO queue discipline
is called M/M/1 queue, following Kendalls notation which was introduced to
standardize the description of queuing models. Kendall introduced a notation for
queuing systems, which includes information about the processes, such as job
arrivals, and the distribution of the time that is needed in the server. This standard
notation is based on a five-character code
A=B=c=N=k, 2:21
where A represents the interarrival time distribution, B is the service time distribu-
tion, c is the number of parallel servers of a station (c 1), N represents the system
capacity, and k is the size of the population.
The elements of queues and servers are represented in the term station. Hence,
a station can be described using Kendalls notation as
A=B=c < strategy > pre emptive max imal queue length 2:22
The short forms for the mostly used distributions of queuing systems are:
Scenario 7
Let Kendalls notation be used as follows:
Arrival state
Effective arrival state
Effective rate of one server
Server utilization
Interarrival time between vehicles n1 and n
Based on this notation for the various classes of queuing system models,
a performance analysis can be introduced based on steady-state parameters for:
1. M/M/1 queues
2. M/G/1 queues
3. M/Ek/1 queues
4. M/D/1 queues
5. M/M/1/N queues
For the first three queues, the service times are exponentially distributed for M,
generally distributed for G, and Erlang distributed for E. For the fourth case, D, the
service times are constant. For M/M/1/N queues, the system capacity is limited to N;
and for M/M/c queues, the channels c operate in parallel.
The exponential distribution can be characterized as follows: Let X be an
absolute continuous random variable. Let its supportthe set of values that the
random variable can takebe the set of positive real numbers:
Rx 0; 1:
1 Yk
Ek; ln U i : 2:24
i1
Table 2.4 Advances and limitations for analytical and simulation solutions
Solution Advantages Limitations
Analytical Results which are general Preconditions, concerning the distribution
for use with all possible of the interarrival times and time to be
parameterizations served
Substantial problems, to handle queuing
strategies
Numerical efforts, to solve the state
equations
Results only for the steady state
Only mean values, no predictions about
the minimum and the maximum or
the history of individual jobs
Simulation No preconditions concerning A single simulation run only corresponds
based the distributions to a single random sample, all simulation
Any strategy can be reproduced results are singular solutions for the given
Observation of the individual initial state, and they are not general results
history for jobs and queue lengths for the whole model
possible
simulative solutions, which of the two methods should be used. This comparison
can be restricted, reflecting limitations and advances (see Table 2.4).
Item cost which represents the actual costs of the Q items acquired.
Order costs which are the costs of initiating a purchase or production setup.
Holding costs which are the costs for maintaining items in inventory.
Shortage costs represent the costs of failing to satisfy demand.
In general, inventory problems of the type discussed above are often easier to
solve then queuing problems.
SUBROUTINE ARRIVE
INCLUDE mm1.dc1
...
Schedule next arrival
. . ..
IF (SERVER.EQ.BUSY) THEN
. . ...
END
SUBROUTINE DEPART
INCLUDE mm1.dc1
...
Check whether the queue is empty or not
. . ..
IF (NIQ.EQ.0) THEN
. . ...
SERVER IDLE
. . ..
ELSE
Queue is not empty
NIQNIQ+1
. . ..
END
72 2 Transportation Models
In simulating queuing systems, the modeler sees a probabilistic world. The time it
takes a system to fail, e.g., a traffic light system at a road intersection, is a random
variable, as is the time it takes maintenance to repair the road intersection traffic
light system. Thus, modeling probabilistic problems requires skills in recognizing
the random behavior of the various phenomena that must be incorporated into the
model, analyzing the nature of these random processes, and providing appropriate
mechanisms in the model to mimic the random processes.
If X is a variable that can assume any of several possible values over a range of
such possible values, X is said to be a random variable.
Let X be a variable in which the range of possible values is finite or countable
infinite. For x1, x2, . . ., the probability mass function of X is
pxi PX xi 2:26
Zb
P a X b f xdx 2:28
a
f x
Z 0 for all x in
f x 1: 2:29
x
and by
Z1
E X xxdx, 2:31
1
h i h i
V X E X EX2 E X 2 : 2:32
1. First question: relates to whether the data can take on only discrete values or
whether the data is continuous.
2. Second question: focuses at the symmetry of the data and if there is asymmetry,
which direction it lies in. In other words, are positive and negative outliers
equally likely or is one more likely than the other?
3. Third question: looks whether there are upper or lower limits on the data; there
are some data items like revenues that cannot be lower than zero, whereas there
are others like operating margins that cannot exceed a value (100 %).
4. Fourth question: relates to the likelihood of observing extreme values in the
distribution; in some data, the extreme values occur very infrequently, whereas
in others, they occur more often (URL 1).
For continuous distributions some of which one can use are the:
For discrete distributions some of which one can use are the:
Example 2.1
Assume the number X of defective assemblies in the sample n of manufactured
assemblies is binomially distributed. Let n 30 and the probability of defective
assembly p 0.02 results in
X2
30
P X 2 0:02x 0:9830x
x0
x 2:33
0:5455 0:3340 0:0988 0:9783
The mean number of defectives in the sample is
Example 2.2
Assume a class of vehicle has a time to failure that follows the Weibull distribution
with 200 h, 0.333, and 0. The mean time to failure yields for the mean
Weibull distribution:
1
EX v 1 200 3 1 2003! 1200 h, 2:36
The probability that a vehicle fails before 200 h can be calculated based on the
cumulative distribution function of the Weibull distribution as follows:
0:333
Fx 1 e a 1 e 200 1 e2:15 0:884
xv 2000
2:38
The constraints for the task steps in Table 2.6 are shown in Table 2.7.
Once the four steps have been completed, the travel demand forecasting model
provides planners with data for existing travel patterns, which are validated and
cross-checked to determine how well the model predicts current data, such as park-
and-ride utilization, highway vehicle traffic counts, etc.
Besides actual travel surveys, travel demand models use census data to deter-
mine the transportation demands, establish baseline conditions, and identify trends.
Thus, trips are often predicted separately by purpose (i.e., work, shopping, etc.) and
then aggregated into total trips on the network. From this perspective, it can be
concluded that travel demand models are designed primarily to identify congestion
problems because they mainly measure peak-period motor vehicle trips on major
roadways. They generally report roadway level of service (LOS), and a letter grade
from A (best) to F (worst) indicates vehicle traffic speeds and delays.
As described in TDM Encyclopedia (2014), travel demand models often incor-
porate several types of bias favoring automobile transport over other modes and
undervaluing travel demand modeling strategies (TRB 2007). The travel surveys
they are based on tend to ignore or undercount nonmotorized travel and so under-
value nonmotorized transportation improvements for achieving transportation
planning objectives (Stopher and Greaves 2007). Most do not accurately account
for the tendency of traffic to maintain equilibrium (congestion causes travelers
to shift time, route, mode, and destination) and the effects of generated traffic
that result from roadway capacity expansion, and so tend to exaggerate future
congestion problems and the benefits of expanding roadway capacity. They are
not sensitive to the impacts many types of travel demand model strategies have on
trip generation and traffic problems and so undervalue travel demand model
benefits.
2.4 Traffic Demand Models 77
Assume a trip-based demand model predicts the average number of trips d with
given characteristics executed for a given reference period resulting in the equation
(Cascetta 2009)
d C1 ; C2 ; . . . d SEV, L : D: 2:39
78 2 Transportation Models
where the average travel demand flow between two transportation analysis zones
has the characteristics C1, C2, . . . Cn, which can be expressed as a function of vector
SEV, a socioeconomic variable, related to the activity system and/or the decision
makers, and of a vector L, level-of-service attributes of the transportation supply
system. Demand functions also involve a vector D of coefficients or parameters.
Trip characteristics that are considered relevant in trip-based demand models
include (Cascetta 2009):
WF FLCi
TPCi TCZ ab X , 2:41
FLCij
congestion occurs when the volume of traffic generates a demand for space that
is greater than the available road capacity, commonly termed saturation (see
Sect. 2.3). There are a number of specific circumstances which cause congestion.
The majority of those circumstances are the result of a reduction in road capacity at
a given point due to roadwork, weather conditions, accidents, and/or other incidents
or an increase in the number of vehicles required for a given transportation volume
of people and/or freight. But traffic congestion in transportation is not limited to
roads. It is also a problem at airports, at harbors, on railways, and for travelers
on public transportation networks.
As introduced in Sect. 2.2, traffic congestion can be studied either at a micro-
scopic level, where the motion of individual vehicles is tracked, or at a macroscopic
level, where vehicles are treated as a fluidlike continuum. Therefore, both macro-
scopic and microscopic models are used to address various traffic flow and
congestion phenomena, such as phase transitions, a phenomenon whereby free-
flow traffic can spontaneously break down for no obvious reason and persist
in a self-maintained congested state for long periods (Kerner and Rehborn 1997).
The importance of modeling and controlling traffic congestion can also be seen by
reviewing the projects funded by the European Research Council (ERC) for the
period 20122017. Due to the manifold types of traffic phenomena, traffic flow
modeling cannot fully predict under what conditions a traffic jam, defined as heavy
but smoothly flowing traffic, may suddenly occur. The reason is that individual
incident, such as accidents, a single car braking, an abrupt steering maneuver by a
single vehicle, or a truck breakdown, in a previously smooth traffic flow may cause
a so-called cascading failure. A cascading failure in a traffic flow system of vehicles
means that the failure of one vehicle can trigger the failure of successive vehicles.
A cascading failure usually begins when one vehicle of the traffic flow system fails
and the effect spreads out and creates a sustained traffic jam. When this happens,
nearby traffic nodes must then, if possible, take up the stagnancy caused by the
traffic jam which can, in turn, overload those nodes, causing them to fail, resulting
in serious congestion. As mentioned in Sect. 2.2, theoretical traffic flow models
apply the rules of fluid dynamics to traffic flow, like a fluid flow in a pipe. In spite
of the poor correlation of theoretical traffic flow models to actual traffic flow,
empirical models have been chosen with the scope to forecast traffic flow. These
traffic models use a combination of macro-, micro-, and mesoscopic modeling
features, with the addition of entropy effects, by grouping vehicles and randomizing
flow patterns within the node segments of the network. These models are then
calibrated by measuring actual traffic flows on the links in the network, and
the baseline traffic flows are adjusted accordingly (Lindsey and Verhoef 1999;
Lindsey et al. 2012).
Traffic flow can be described by the variables density (k), speed (v), and flow (q),
measured in vehicles per lane per mile, mile per hour, and vehicles per lane per
hour. At the macroscopic level, these variables are defined under stationary
conditions at each point in space and time and are expressed by the fundamental
equation of traffic flow theory, given in (2.11). For safety reasons, speed usually
80 2 Transportation Models
declines as density increases which means that the less vehicles per lane per hour,
the nearer the vehicles are to driving at free-flow speed vf. At higher densities,
the flow in the flow-density graph (see Fig. 2.1), as well as the speed-flow graph (see
Fig. 2.2), drops more rapidly, reaching zero at the congestion density, kj, where
speed and flow are both zero. Thus we can say that the uphill branch of the graph in
Figs. 2.1 and 2.2 is referred to as uncongested, unrestricted free traffic flow; and the
downhill branch of the graph in Figs. 2.1 and 2.2 is referred to as congested,
restricted, or queued. Thus in general mathematical terms of transportation supply
models, the speed-traffic flow graph in Fig. 2.2 can be used to formulate
relationships among performance, cost, and flow. Hence, interpreting traffic flow
as quantity of trips supplied by the road per unit of time, a trip cost curve C(q) can
be generated in the form of
uC D
Cq c0 , 2:42
v q
where c0 denotes trip costs, uC is the unit cost of travel time, D is trip distance, and
v(q) is speed expressed in terms of flow. Then the trip cost curve based on (2.42)
shows a positively sloped portion corresponding to the congested branch of the
speed-flow curve. Thus, C(q) measures the cost of a trip taken by a vehicle.
Therefore, the total cost of q trips is then
TCq Cq
ACq Cq q , 2:44
q q
Congestion simulations and real-time observations have shown that in heavy but
free-flow traffic, jams can arise spontaneously, triggered by minor events, such as
the so-called butterfly effect, e.g., an abrupt steering maneuver by a single motorist.
The butterfly effect is the sensitive dependency on initial conditions in which a
small change at one place in a deterministic nonlinear system can result in large
differences in a later state.
A team of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) mathematicians
(Flynn et al. 2009) has developed a model that describes the formation of phantom
jams, in which small disturbances (a driver hitting the brake too hard or getting
too close to another car) in heavy traffic can become amplified into a full-
blown, self-sustaining traffic jam. Key to the study is the realization that the
mathematics of such jams, which the researchers call jamitons, are strikingly
similar to the equations that describe detonation waves produced by explosions,
according to Aslan Kasimov, lecturer in MITs Department of Mathematics. That
discovery enabled the team to solve traffic jam equations that were first theorized
in the 1950s.
2.6 Graph Models 81
G V; E 2:45
where V consists of a nonempty set V of vertices (or nodes), each node represents a
variable, and
E V
V: 2:46
where E is the set of directed edges (or arcs) and edges encode the dependencies.
Each directed edge (u, v) E has a start (tail) vertex u and an end (head) vertex v.
Note: A directed graph G (V, E) is simply a set V together with a binary relation
E on V.
In graph theory, the following terminology is of importance. In a simple graph,
each edge connects two different vertices; and no two edges connect the same pair
of vertices. Multigraphs can have multiple edges connecting the same two vertices.
When m different edges connect vertices u and v, we say that {u, v} is an edge
of multiplicity m. An edge that connects a vertex to itself is called a loop.
A pseudograph can include loops as well as multiple edges connecting the same
pair of vertices.
For a set V, let [V]k denote the set of k element subsets of V. Equivalently, [V]k
is the set of all k combinations of V.
An undirected graph, (2.45) consists of a nonempty set V of vertices (or nodes)
and a set
E V 2 , 2:47
U 1 , U 2 V, U 1 \ U2 O
Let U3 blocks the paths between X and Y; which can be interpreted as blocking
the flow of information. A consequence of this rule is the following Markov
property for Markov networks, also called the local Markov property:
A everything elsenA
One of the most interesting and powerful features of graphs is their use in
modeling structures. With this possibility, one can model relationships, flight
schedules, etc. By building a graph model, we use the appropriate type of graph
(see Table 2.8) to capture the important features of the application. In a graph-based
airport network, vertices represent the airport destinations; and edges represent the
airway links between the destinations, as shown in Fig. 2.4.
To model an airport network in which the number of links between the vertices
(airports) is important, we can use a multigraph model, as shown in Fig. 2.5.
To model an airport network in which diagnostic links at the vertices (airports) is
of importance, we can use pseudograph model where loops are allowed, as shown in
Fig. 2.6.
2.6 Graph Models 83
becomes the input to the next until the transportation vehicle exits pipe 5. As shown
in Fig. 2.9, pipe 2 cannot handle the traffic flow that pipe 1 can deliver; and,
therefore, it restricts the traffic flow. Because of pipe 2s limited capacities, it
restricts the flow from upstream pipes and starves the downstream pipes. Pipe
3, pipe 4, and pipe 5 can only work on what pipe 2 delivers, meaning it determines
the transportation systems capacity. Therefore, bottlenecks are important
considerations because they impact the traffic flow and thereby the average speed
of vehicles. The main consequence of a bottleneck is an immediate reduction in
capacity of the transportation system roadway. The Federal Highway Authority has
stated that 40 % of all congestion is from bottlenecks, as shown in Fig. 2.9.
Bottlenecks are characterized with regard to their characteristic features, which
are stationary and moving bottlenecks. Stationary bottlenecks occur when a multi-
lane road is reduced by one or more lanes, which causes the vehicular traffic in the
ending lanes to merge into the other lanes.
Let us assume that at a certain location x0, the highway narrows to one lane.
Thus, the maximum traffic flow rate is now limited to qc1l, since only one lane of the
two is available. The traffic flow rate is shared by qc1l and qc, but its vehicle density
kc1l is higher.
As described for Fig. 2.9, we can state that before the first vehicles reach location
x0, the traffic flow is unimpeded. However, downstream of x0, the roadway narrows,
reducing the capacity by half. Thus, vehicles begin queuing upstream of x0 which
2.7 Bottleneck Analysis 87
results in a slower mean space speed vqu of the vehicles compared with the free-flow
speed vf of vehicles. The vehicles driving in the one-lane queue will begin to clear,
and the traffic jam can dissipate. But the free space mean speed of the vehicles
driving on the now one-lane capacity road will be slower than the vehicles moving
at free-flow speed vf.
Moving bottlenecks are those caused due to slow-moving vehicles, such as
trucks, that disrupt the traffic flow. Moving bottlenecks can be active or inactive
bottlenecks. If the reduced traffic flow rate caused by a moving bottleneck is greater
than the actual traffic flow rate downstream of the vehicle, then this bottleneck is
said to be an active bottleneck. In Fig. 2.10, a moving bottleneck is represented by a
slow-moving heavy tractor with a mean space speed vt approaching a downstream
location. If the reduced traffic flow rate of the tractor is less than the downstream
traffic flow rate, then the tractor becomes an inactive bottleneck.
An analytical expression for capacity reductions caused by a moving bottleneck
where each lane has an underperforming flow of traffic can be described in terms of
the desired traffic flow rate and can be modeled by the flow conservation equation.
This occurs when vehicles pass an observer moving with speed v when traffic is in a
steady flow rate-density state (see Fig. 2.1 in Sect. 2.2):
qr q kv 2:48
as a result of its presence, the steady states upstream and downstream of it are
different. This occurs in practice when the bottleneck holds back a queue, i.e., when
a queue is detected behind it but no queue exists for a long sector of road
downstream. Equation 2.48 implies that if a stable passing traffic flow rate qr exists
when an active bottleneck moves at speed v, then the two steady states before and
after it must be somewhere on the red line of Fig. 2.1. Therefore, qr will exclusively
denote the passing rate when a bottleneck is active.
Identifying a bottleneck in a transportation system is critical; therefore, the
importance of bottleneck analysis cannot be overstated because the results are
used not only in determining capacity but also in planning and scheduling traffic
flows.
Different methods for bottleneck analysis are known and applied in
transportation analysis, such as:
Capacity utilization
Queuing time
Elapsed time
Shifting shortage
with pi as capacity utilization of the ith resource. The advantage of this method is
the intrinsic simplicity making it ideal for transportation planning applications,
such as roadway capacity planning and design, congestion management, traffic
impact studies, etc. The intersection capacity utilization method is also defined as
the sum of ratios of the approach volume divided by the approach capacity for each
part of the intersection which controls the overall traffic signal timing plus an
allowance for clearance times (Crommelin 1974). Hence, it can be predicted how
much reserve capacity is available and how much the intersection is over capacity
but does not predict delay. Moreover, the capacity utilization method can be used to
predict how often a roadway intersection will cause congestion. But for this, the
method requires a specific set of data to be collected which includes traffic volume,
number of lanes, saturated traffic flow rates, signal timings, reference cycle length,
and lost times for an intersection. Then the method can sum the amount of time
required to serve all movements at a saturation rate for a given cycle length and
divide it by the reference cycle length. This means that the method is similar to
summing critical volume to saturation flow ratios which allow consideration of
minimum timings. Moreover, the concept of level of services (LOS) is used
whereby LOS reports on the amount of reserve capacity or capacity deficits.
2.7 Bottleneck Analysis 89
In order to calculate the LOS for intersection capacity utilization, the intersection
capacity utilization (ICU) must be computed first, which can be achieved as
follows:
v tLi
ICU max tMin ; RCL 2:50
si RCL
with tMin as minimum green time, critical movement i, v/si as volume to saturation
flow rate, RCL as reference cycle length, and tLi as lost time for critical movement
i (Husch 2003).
Once the ICU is fully calculated for an intersection, the ICU Level of Service for
that intersection can be calculated based on the following criteria (Husch 2003):
This grading criterion shows some specific details about the specific intersection
(Husch 2003):
transportation within the supply chain, which can be calculated after Tan and
Bowden (2004) as follows:
with Wi as queuing time utilization of the ith resource. The advantage of the
method is its easy implementation.
The elapsed time method is a traffic flow scheduling problem in which processing
time is associated with their respective probabilities including the transportation time.
Finding a good traffic flow schedule for a given set of activities helps transportation
managers to effectively control traffic flows and provide solutions for activity sequenc-
ing. A traffic flow activity scheduling problem consists when determining the
processing sequence for n vehicles on a road network. Therefore, the objective of
the elapsed time method can be to minimize the time required to pass a bottleneck. The
notation of the elapsed time method contains sequences, vehicles, activity processing
times, and the probability associated with activity processing times which finally results
in the expected processing time of an activity. The calculation of an elapsed time
approach is based on the following criteria which have been mentioned previously:
S Sequence of activities 1, 2, 3,. . .n
Vj Vehicle j, j 1,2,.......k
A1 Processing time of ith activity for vehicle V1
A2 Processing time of ith activity for vehicle V2
A2 Processing time of ith activity for vehicle V3
...
...
...
...
The sequence of activities is processed on the vehicles in the order Vi, i 1, 2, 3, . . .
with A1, A2, and A3 as processing time of each activity on vehicle V1, V2, and V3,
2.7 Bottleneck Analysis 91
PT i Ai
Pi 2:52
The shifting shortage method, in contrast with the sole shortage approach,
requested average active time steps of shortages based on which it will be possible
to estimate the timeliness shortages are shifting. This allows identification of
nonshortages too. This method differentiates between the probability of the exis-
tence of shortages and the existence of nonshortages. Moreover, this method allows
separation between primary and secondary shortages due to the average shortage
over time (Lima et al. 2008). But the primary methodological problem of this
method is its implementation and the computing time required. Figure 2.11 shows
the principle of moving shortages (with the shortages designated as S1 and S2).
As shown in Fig. 2.11, at a specific time step, the shortage is caused by the active
periods of tasks which may have the longest runtime. Therefore, the shifting
shortage is based on the overlap of shortages.
Shipping time.
Arrival time.
Quay time for uploading/loading.
Accomplishable delay compensation through optimization of an objective func-
tion to maximize it; for each criterion a higher value will be preferred opposite
a lower value.
Accomplished improvement to compensate for delays.
Trucks
Trains
Feeders
Graph theory can be used to model road intersections with running and waiting
links. Therefore, vertices (nodes) are usually located at the intersection between
road segments included in a model for continuous service in transportation, such as
2.8 ProModel Case Study: Road Intersection 93
an urban road network. Typical examples of road intersections in urban areas are
individual modes, such as cars, buses, pedestrians, etc., using a road intersection
network represented by nodes. Thus, links correspond to connections between
nodes to constitute the urban road network. Figure 2.12 shows an example of an
intersection in an urban road system in Clausthal-Zellerfeld, Germany, embedded
in ProModel.
In this case study, two distinct types of links are considered: running links, which
represent a vehicles real movements as it moves along the road in the urban road
section, and waiting or queuing links, representing queuing at intersections in the
city road system, as shown in Fig. 2.13.
The level of detail of the road system depends on the purpose of the model.
In this case, the road intersection to be studied is represented by nodes, where
the accessed links converge into a four-arm road intersection. The graph model
representation for this road intersection is shown in Fig. 2.14 for single node
Fig. 2.14 Single node (left) model of road intersection in Fig. 2.13 and detailed representation
(right). For details, see text
with
tra(f): function relating to the running time on link a to the flow vector
twa(f): function relating to the waiting time on link a to the flow vector
tma(f): function relating to the monetary cost on link a to the flow vector
Round and elliptic nodes represent the directions from which cars arrive at the
junction ! arriving points.
Rectangular nodes show the traffic lights (or other traffic flow regulations) for
different driving directions.
2.8 ProModel Case Study: Road Intersection 95
The node representation in Fig. 2.14 requires, in ProModel, the allocation of the
respective locations which have specific attributes, as shown in Fig. 2.18:
The outermost nodes, North, East, South, and West, represent the link with other
junctions from which cars arrive at the first simulated location of this direction. The
96 2 Transportation Models
Fig. 2.16 Birds-eye view of the four-arm intersection nodes in downtown Clausthal-Zellerfeld
The main algorithm for handling the traffic light signals consists of four different
cases realized by three if conditions and one else case (Jehle 2014):
IF(CLOCK(SEC)/x@nM)AND((CLOCK(SEC)@x>0)AND(CLOCK(SEC)@x<(xy
+1)))
//each direction has a green phase of x seconds
//signal for direction M green
THEN{DriveM1}
ELSE {
IF (CLOCK(SEC)/x@nM)AND(CLOCK(SEC)@x0)
THEN {DriveM4 DriveMAlt22}
//signal for direction M red-yellow
//and yellow for the former M
ELSE {
IF (CLOCK(SEC)/x@nM)AND(CLOCK(SEC)@x>(x-y))
THEN {DriveM21} //signal for direction M yellow
ELSE {DriveM3} //signal for direction M red
}
}
The algorithm of the above form can be used for every length x of the green
phase and different numbers of driving directions. In this case study, there are four
sets of driving directions. Each category combines some directions, which can be
used without the need to cross the path of another car, as shown in Table 2.10.
The driving directions shown in Table 2.10 allow the logic macros of the
ProModel simulation model to be specified as shown in Table 2.11.
The processing decides, for each entity, the way through the path network
and the behavior during the simulation. The following algorithm shows the link
between traffic light signals and the movement of the simulated cars for
direction M.
This logic was implemented together with the macros in the processing table,
showing the parts of the four entities in Tables 2.12, 2.13, 2.14, and 2.15.
ArrivalNorth EXIT
ArrivalEast TrafficlightEN 0.4 MOVE ON Traffic
TrafficlightES 0.3 1
TrafficlightEW 0.3
East ArrivalEast First1 MOVE ON Arrival
ArrivalSouth EXIT
ArrivalWest
101
102
1
ArrivalEast
ArrivalSouth
ArrivalWest TrafficlightWN 0.3 1 MOVE ON Traffic
TrafficlightWE 0.3
TrafficlightWS 0.4
West ArrivalWest FIRST MOVE ON Arrival
1
103
104 2 Transportation Models
2.9 Exercises
Lima E, Chwif L, Baretto M (2008) Methodology for selecting the best suitable bottleneck
detection method. In: Proceedings SCS 32nd conference on winter simulation. Society for
Computer Simulation International, San Diego, pp 740754
Lindsey CR, Verhoef ET (1999) Congestion modelling, Series Tinbergen Institute discussion
papers, Number 99091/3
Lindsey CR, van den Berg VAV, Verhoef ET (2012) Step tolling with bottleneck queuing
congestion. J Urb Econ 72(1):4659
Little JDC, Graves SC (2008) Littles law, Chapter 5. In: Chhajed D, Loewe TJ (eds) Building
intuition: insight from basis operations management models and principles. Springer Publ.,
pp 81100
Litman T (2006) Whats it worth? Economic evaluation for transportation decision making,
transportation association of Canada, (www.tac-atc.ca); at www.vtpi.org/worth.pdf
Litman T (2013) Congestion costing critique: critical evaluation of the urban mobility report.
In: VTPI, (www.vtpi.org); at www.vtpi.org/UMR_critique.pdf
Moeller DPF, Haas R, Vakilzadian H (2013) Ubiquitous learning: teaching modeling and simula-
tion (M&S) with technology. In: Vakilzadain H, Crosbie R, Huntsinger R, Cooper K (eds)
Proceedings of the 2013 summer simulation multiconference GCMS 2013. Curran Publication,
Red Hook, pp 125132
Muench S (2004) Traffic Concepts, http://www.google.de/url?sat&rctj&q&esrcs&
sourceweb&cd1&ved0CDEQFjAA&urlhttps%3A%2F%2Ffanyv88.com%3A443%2Fhttp%2Fcourses.washington.edu%
2Fcee320w%2Flectures%2FTraffic%2520Concepts.ppt&eiEkpRU82uC4e1tAajiYGYCw&
usgAFQjCNFOFglgi-iDYswasEvo91YzMZ_OKg&bvmbv.65058239,d.Yms
Scheurer J, Horan E, Bajwa S (2009) Benchmarking public transport and land use integration
in Melbourne and Hamburg: hints for policy makers. Presentation at 23rd AESOP 2009 congress,
liverpool
Small KA (1998) Project evaluation, Chapter 5. In: Gomez-Ibanez JA, Tye W, Winston C (eds)
Transportation policy and economics: a handbook in honor of John R. Meyer. www.brookings.
edu, www.uctc.net/papers/379.pdf
Stahl WA (2002) Statistical data analysis (in German). Vieweg Publ. Wiesbaden
Stopher PR, Greaves SP (2007) Household travel surveys: where are we going? Transp Res A
41(5):367381
Sundarapandian V (2009) Queuing theory, Chapter 7. In: Probability, statistics and queuing
theory. PHI Learning, New Delhi
Tan AC, Bowden RO (2004) The Virtual Transport System (VITS)final report. Monograph,
Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC
TDM Encyclopedia (2013) Transport model improvements: improving methods for evaluating the
effects and value of transportation system changes; see http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm125.htm
TDM Encyclopedia (2014) Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Victoria
Transportation Research Board, see http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/sr/sr288.pdf
TRB (2007) Metropolitan Travel Forecasting: Current Practice and Future Direction, Special
Report 288, Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org); at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/
onlinepubs/sr/sr288.pdf
TRB (2012) The effect of smart growth policies on travel demand, capacity project C16, Strategic
Highway Research Program (SHRP 2), (www.trb.org); http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/
shrp2/SHRP2prepubC16.pdf
USDOT (2003) US Department of Transportation, Economic Analysis Primer, Office of Asset
Management, FHWA, USDOT, 2003. www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/asstmgmt/primer.pdf
Virginiadot (2014) http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/resources/vtm/what_is_travel_demand_
modeling.pdf
Wang Y, Zhao Q, Zheng D (2005) Bottlenecks in production networks: an overview. J Syst Sci
Syst Eng 14:18ff
Yucesan E, Schruben LW (1998) Complexity of simulation models: a graph theoretic approach.
Journal of Comput 10:94108
108 2 Transportation Models
Links
(URL 1) http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/New_Home_Page/StatFile/statdistns.htm
(URL 2) http://www.tc.faa.gov/acb300/aasw.asp
(URL 3) http://www.tc.faa.gov/acb300/more_simmod.asp
(URL 4) http://ww1.jeppesen.com/support/technical_support_details.jsp?prodNameTxt2Total
%20Airspace%20and%20Airport%20Modeler%20%28TAAM%29
http://www.springer.com/978-1-4471-5636-9