navigation data & needs may 9, 2003 david a. weekly chief, lrd navigation planning center 304...
Post on 27-Mar-2015
214 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Navigation Data & Needs
May 9, 2003
David A. Weekly
Chief, LRD Navigation Planning Center
304 529-5635
david.a.weekly@usace.army.mil
Topics
• Introduction
• Available Data
• Data Applications
• Waterway Network
• What We Model
• What We Would Like to Model
• NAS Comments
Introduction
What Does The Modeler Have To do?
• P & G Compliant
• Use Engineering Input
• Provide Environmental Inputs
• Determine Key Drivers
Introduction
Ultimately, The Modeler Has To Provide Decision
Makers Enough Information To Make a
Decision, Given:
• Time
• Money
• Data
Data
Most Originate From National Data Center (NDC)
http://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/ndc/index.htm
• Waterborne Commerce Statistics Center (WCSC)
• Lock Performance Measurement System (LPMS)
• Cost Data
• Other
WCSC Data
• Point To Point
• Commodity
• Operator
• Registered Vessel
• Tons (or Other)
• Route
NY StateBarge Canal
Hudson
Allegheny
Monon-gahela
Kanawha
Big Sandy
Ohio
Mississippi
Missouri
Illinois
Green
Cumberland
TennesseeBlackWarrior
AlabamaTom-bigbee
TennTom
Atchafalaya
Red
Ouachita
Arkansas
Gulf Intracoastal Waterway
AtlanticIntracoastalWaterway
San Joaquin
Sacramento
SnakeColumbia
In 2001:•582.6 Million Tons•4,000 Unique O-D’s•51,000 O-D-Commodity
Triples
LPMS
• Availability
• Lockage Type
• Times - Delay and Processing
• Flotilla
• Vessel Types
• Commodity
• Tonnage
Use This Data
WCSC LPMS
Barge Type X X
Loaded Barges X
Loading X
Empty Barges X
Commodity X
Powered Vessel X
Flotilla X
LPMS - WCSC LOCK COMPARISONS
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Per
cen
t w
ith
in 1
0%
Tons
Trips
http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/functions/cw/cecwp/General_guidance/guidance.htm
Vessel Operating Costs
• Planning Guidance Memoranda
• General Guidance
• Economic Guidance Memoranda– Interest Rates– Deep Draft Operating Costs– Shallow Draft Operating Costs
• Study Guidance Memoranda
Other Costs
• Inventory Holding Costs
• Is it Important ?
– Most Inland Probably Not
– Containers and Specialized – Yes
• Where do we get the Commodity Value ?
• In LRD – 1-2% of Delay Cost
Other Data• OMBIL• Port Series• Navigation Charts• Waterway Point Directory• Vessel Master File• Port Master File• Lock Characteristics• Passengers and Containers• Dredging
Data Applications• WCSC
– Rate Analysis
– Forecasts
• LPMS
– Lock Performance
• Vessel Costs
– Adjust Waterway Portion Of Rates
Water Routing
Land Routing
Metropolitan Statistical Area
Rate Analysis
Forecasts• WCSC gives :
– History– Shippers and Carriers Identified
• What are the Drivers ?
• Why are They Here ?
• What Will They Do ?
• What are the Possible Futures?
• How Are They Affected by Congestion?
• Are There Alternative Sources?
Lock 101
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
- 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000
Thousand of Tons
Average Transit Per Tow (hours)
FIGURE I-32-supplement CHICKAMAUGA – 360’ x 60’TONNAGE-TRANSIT SIMULATION RESULTS
Hyperbolic equation :
y =
4.0669.660
)000,250,7(
)300(
x
x
New Cumberland 2002 Main Chamber ClosureProcessing Times
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250
Minutes
Perc
ent
With Helper Boats Avg = 131
Without Helper Boats Avg = 153
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
- 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000
Thousand of Tons
Average Transit Per Tow (hours)
FIGURE I-34-supplement CHICKAMAUGA – 360’ x 60’WITH HELPER BOATS TONNAGE-TRANSIT SIMULATION RESULTS
Hyperbolic equation :
y =
4.0823.460
)000,000,10(
)200(
x
x
Vessel Cost Application
• Use LPMS Flotilla Data
• Apply IWR Costs to Equipment Types
• Yields Underway and Delay Costs ($/Hr or
$/Ton-Hr)
Waterway Network
Sector 11
Sector 12
Sector 13
L39
L38
L40
J11
J12
J13
J14
P44
P42
P41
P43
P45
RiverSegment
(e.g. Kanawha River)
J = JunctionL = LockP = PortB = Bends / 1-way
Network Elements
System Network (Cost Module)
• Add annual tonnage through each lock
• Determine delay at each lock using curves • Compute travel costs for each annual shipment
tons
tran
sit
/ to
w
tons
tran
sit
/ to
w
tons
tran
sit
/ to
w
tons
tran
sit
/ to
w
tons
tran
sit
/ to
w
tons
tran
sit
/ to
w
tons
tran
sit
/ to
w
tons
tran
sit
/ to
w
tons
tran
sit
/ to
w
tons
tran
sit
/ to
w
Link To Structural Reliability
• Engineering Reliability Analysis– Detailed structural condition
studies– Develop hazard functions &
Probabilities of Unsatisfactory Performance (PUPs) for major lock components
– Identify consequences of unsatisfactory performance (Repair costs & Closures)
• Economic Reliability Analysis– Simulate 50 year project-life– Evaluated alternatives
Miter Gate Hazard Functions for Varying Traffic Projections
0
0.5
1
1958 1983 2008 2033 2058
Year
Haz
ard
Ra
te High Traffic Projection
Most Likely Traffic
Low Traffic Projection
ANNUALHAZARDRATE %
NO FAIL(1 - AHR)
NEW GATE 5%
MAJOR 35% REPAIR
180 DAYS/$6,000,000
30 DAYS/$2,000,000
ANNUALHAZARDRATE (AHR)
REPAIRLEVEL
CLOSURE TIME/REPAIR COST
LOOP TO NEXTYEAR VALUES
TEMP. REPAIR 60%W/ NEW GATE
60 DAYS/$5,000,000
NEW GATERELIABILITY
NEW GATERELIABILITY
MOVE BACK5 YEARS ONHAZ. RATE
UPDATEDRELIABILITY
SCHEDULED REPLACEMENT45 DAYS AND $3,500,000
ANNUALHAZARDRATE %
NO FAIL(1 - AHR)
NEW GATE 5%
MAJOR 35% REPAIR
180 DAYS/$6,000,000
30 DAYS/$2,000,000
ANNUALHAZARDRATE (AHR)
REPAIRLEVEL
CLOSURE TIME/REPAIR COST
LOOP TO NEXTYEAR VALUES
TEMP. REPAIR 60%W/ NEW GATE
60 DAYS/$5,000,000
NEW GATERELIABILITY
NEW GATERELIABILITY
MOVE BACK5 YEARS ONHAZ. RATE
UPDATEDRELIABILITY
SCHEDULED REPLACEMENT45 DAYS AND $3,500,000
Are environmental values woven into the formulation and evaluation process to insure that we are practicing adaptive management?
• EOP - Environmental concerns are part and parcel of all USACE missions, decision-making, programs and projects
• Economic Outputs linked to NAVPAT
Integration of Environment
What We Model
Waterway Cost Changes That Arise From Changes:– Traffic Levels and Flow Patterns– Vessel Fleet– Lock Operation (Lockage Polices and Helper Boats,
for Example)– Structural Reliability of Lock Facilities– Taxes and Fees
What We Model
Total Benefits
with Current River
System
$
Total Benefits of New Capacity Resulting
from Reduced Delays of Existing River
Traffic
Total Benefits of New Capacity Resulting
from Additional Tons of River Traffic
Benefits of River Traffic (Land Rate -
River Rate)
Current System-wide Cost of Delay
New Capacity, System-wide Cost of Delay
Total Commodity
Demand Forecasts
Total Benefits of New Capacity
River TonsQ* Q*'
Total Benefits
with Current River
System
$
Total Benefits of New Capacity Resulting
from Reduced Delays of Existing River
Traffic
Total Benefits of New Capacity Resulting
from Additional Tons of River Traffic
Benefits of River Traffic (Land Rate -
River Rate)
Current System-wide Cost of Delay
New Capacity, System-wide Cost of Delay
Total Commodity
Demand Forecasts
Total Benefits of New Capacity
River TonsQ* Q*'
$
Total Benefits of New Capacity Resulting
from Reduced Delays of Existing River
Traffic
Total Benefits of New Capacity Resulting
from Additional Tons of River Traffic
Benefits of River Traffic (Land Rate -
River Rate)
Current System-wide Cost of Delay
New Capacity, System-wide Cost of Delay
Total Commodity
Demand Forecasts
Total Benefits of New Capacity
River TonsQ* Q*'
• Demand - ARS
• Supply – ATC
• Cost Reduction for existing moves (yellow box)
• Cost savings for moves that shift to the waterway (yellow with hash marks)
What We’d Like to Model
• Benefits From Waterway System Improvements
• In So Doing, We Want the Model to be:– Realistic– Consistent With Theory– Consistent With State of Practitioners’ Art
• NAS Had Some Specific Comments
NAS Comments
• Systems Analysis
• Assessments of Nonstructural Alternatives
• Better Integration of ED, EC and EV
• Forecasts and Uncertainty
• Sensitivity of Barge Traffic to Rates
• Modeling Lock Congestion
• Transportation Rates
• Structural Reliability
top related