Network Performance Evaluation Model for HOV Facilities
Publication: Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 113, Issue 4
Abstract
A model to assess the impacts of major high‐occupancy vehicle (HOV) facilities on regional levels of, energy consumption and vehicle air pollution emissions in urban areas is developed and applied. This model can be used to forecast and compare the impacts of alternative HOV facility design and operation plans on traffic patterns, travel costs, mode choice, travel demand, energy consumption, and vehicle emissions. The model is designed to show differences in the overall impacts of alternative HOV facility types, locations, and operation plans, rather than to serve as a tool for detailed engineering design and traffic planning studies. The Network Performance Evaluation Model (NETPEM) combines several urban transportation planning models into a multimodal network equilibrium framework, including a module with which to define the type, location, and operation of the HOV facility to be tested, and an evaluation module with which to assess the impacts of this facility. As an example application, potential impacts of three different HOV lane/ramp facilities, when added to a major expressway in the Pittsburgh metropolitan area, are forecasted. The results of these example runs and potential improvements to the model are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Ahsan, S. M., “The Treatment of Travel Time and Cost Variables in Disaggregate Mode Choice Models,” International Journal of Transport Economics, Vol. 9, No. 1, 1982, pp. 153–169.
2.
Boyce, D. E., Romanos, M. C., Janson, B. N., Prastacos, P., and Ferris, M., Urban Transportation Energy Accounts: Volumes 1 and 2. U.S. Department of Transportation, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, Washington, D.C., 1981.
3.
Brown, G. R., “Analysis of User Preferences for System Characteristics to Cause Modal Shift,” Highway Research Record 417, 1972, pp. 25–36.
4.
Cambridge Systematics, Inc., and Alan M. Voorlees and Associates, Carpool Incentives: Analysis of Transportation and Energy Impacts, U.S. Federal Energy Administration, Washington, D.C., 1976.
5.
Chang, M., Evans, L., Herman, R., and Wasielewski, P., “Gasoline Consumption in Urban Traffic,” Transportation Research Record 599, 1976.
6.
Charles River Associates, Mode Shift Models for Priority Techniques: A Review of Existing Models. Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., 1980.
7.
Charles River Associates, Predicting Travel Volumes for HOV Priority Techniques: Technical Supplement, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., 1982.
8.
Charles River Associates, Predicting Travel Volumes for HOV Priority Techniques: User's Guide, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., 1982.
9.
Eash, R. W., Janson, B. N., and Boyce, D. E., “Equilibrium Trip Assignment: Advantages and Implications for Practice,” Transportation Research Record 728, 1981, pp. 1–8.
10.
Florian, M., and Nguyen, S., “An Application and Validation of Equilibrium Traffic Assignment Methods,” Transportation Science, Vol. 10, No. 4, 1976, pp. 374–390.
11.
Heaton, C., Abkowitz, M., Dann, D., and Jacobson, J., “Impacts and Effectiveness of Third‐Party Vanpooling: Synthesis and Comparison of Findings from Four Demonstration Projects,” Transportation Research Record 823, 1981, pp. 30–41.
12.
Janson, B. N., Ferris, M., Boyce, D. E., and Eash, R. W., “Direct Energy Accounts for Urban Transportation Planning,” Transportation Research Record 728, 1980, pp. 1–8.
13.
Janson, B. N., and Zozaya‐Gorostiza, C., “The Problem of Cyclic Flows in Traffic Assignment,” Transportation Research B21, 1987.
14.
Janson, B. N., Zozaya‐Gorostiza, C., and Southworth, F., “A Network Performance Evaluation Model for Assessing the Impacts of High‐Occupancy Vehicle Facilities,” Technical Report ORNL/TM‐10060, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tenn., 1986.
15.
Janson, B. N., Zozaya‐Gorostiza, C., and Southworth, F., “NETPEM‐PC; User's Manual,” Technical Report ORNL/Sub/85‐27439/1, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tenn., 1986.
16.
JHK and Associates, Development and Integration of a High‐Occupancy Vehicle Model Into the COG/TPB Long Range Planning Process, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, D.C., 1982.
17.
JHK and Associates, Evaluation of Alternative Traffic Operations Plans for Commuter Lanes on the Shirley Highway in Virginia, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., 1977.
18.
Kocur, G., and Hendrickson, C. T., “A Model to Assess Cost and Fuel Savings from Ride Sharing,” Transportation Research B17(4), 1983, pp. 305–315.
19.
LeBlanc, L. J., Helgason, R. V., and Boyce, D. E., “Improved Efficiency of the Frank‐Wolfe Algorithm for Convex Network Programs,” Transportation Science, Vol. 19, No. 4, 1985, pp. 445–462.
20.
McFadden, D., and Reid, F., “Aggregate Travel Demand Forecasting from Disaggregate Demand Models,” Transportation Research Record 534, 1975, pp. 24–37.
21.
McFadden, D., The Theory and Practice of Disaggregate Demand Forecasting for Various Modes of Urban Transportation, Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Berkeley, Calif., 1976.
22.
Sheffi, Y., Urban Transportation Networks: Equilibrium Analysis with Mathematical Programming Methods, Prentice‐Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1985.
23.
Southworth, F., “A Highly Disaggregated Modal‐Split Model—Some Tests,” Environment and Planning A, Vol. 10, No. 7, 1978, pp. 795–812.
24.
Southworth, F., “The Calibration of a Trip Distribution‐Modal Split Model with Origin Specific Cost Decay Parameters,” Area II, Vol. 4, No. 10, 1978, pp. 252–258.
25.
Southworth, F., and Janson, B. N., “Energy Use and Emissions Impact Measurement in TSM,” Journal of Transportation Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 108, No. 4, Jul., 1982, pp. 328–342.
26.
Southworth, F., and Westbrook, F., “Study of Current and Planned High Occupancy Vehicle Lane Use: Performance and Prospects,” Technical Report ORNL/TM‐9847, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tenn., 1985.
27.
Talvitie, A., and Krishner, D., “Specification, Transferability and the Effect of Data Outliers in Modelling the Choice of Mode in Urban Travel,” Transportation, Vol. 7, No. 3, 1978, pp. 311–331.
28.
Train, K. E., “The Sensitivity of Parameter Estimates to Data Specification in Mode Choice Models,” Transportation, Vol. 7, No. 3, 1978, pp. 301–309.
29.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Mobile Source Emission Factors: Final Document for Low Altitude Areas Only,” Technical Report EPA‐40019‐78‐006, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., 1978.
30.
Washington Council of Governments, Considering High Occupancy Vehicle Alternatives in the Urban Transportation Planning Process: Energy Savings. U.S. Department of Transportation and U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C., 1983.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 113 • Issue 4 • July 1987
Pages: 381 - 401
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 ASCE.
History
Published online: Jul 1, 1987
Published in print: Jul 1987
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.