SHRP 2 Reliability Project L38

Minnesota Pilot Test Site

October 29, 2013

Minnesota Department of Transportation

SRF Consulting Group, Inc.

L02: 1) Were you able to identify contributing factors of unreliability?

2) Were you able to validate your findings?

2

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Travel Time (minutes)

None Weather Event Crash

Incident Road Work OtherCombination

3

L02: 3) Explain the Barriers or challenges to using the L02 Guide

DMS Logs• Message• Time Deployed• Time Cleared

MnCMAT Records2

• Time• Location• Severity

RTMC Incidents• Time• Type Code• Response Code

Road Work1

• Time/duration• Location• Impacts

Crashes• Time/duration• Location• Severity

Incidents• Time/duration• Impact• Type/cause

Road Work DB• Time Start/End• Impact• Details

Crash Database• Time Start/End• Impact• Details

Incident Database• Time Start/End• Impact• Details

Data Sources Pre-Processing Database Inputs

1 Construction and maintenance activities also being identified through MnDOT news releases.

2 Crash records also contain weather and road conditions data will be referenced to weather data.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Travel Time (min)

None_Weekdays_Apr to Sep time: 9 to 19 (12849) Twins_A_Weekdays_Apr to Sep time: 9 to 19 (1813)

VMT & None_Weekdays_Apr to Sep time: 9 to 19 (12849) VMT & Twins_A_Weekdays_Apr to Sep time: 9 to 19 (1813)

4

L02: 4) Usefulness/Value of the L02 Guide

L02: 5) Suggested Guide refinements

5

L02: 6) Other Comments

6

L07: 1) Use of toola. Ease of GUIb. Data input

7

L07: 2) Explain your test case (this is probably best suited for the power point)

8

I-94 Westbound

Lowry Hill

Tunnel

I-35W SB

On Ramp to

11th Street

TH 280

On Ramp to

Huron Blvd

L07: 3) Were you able to validate/calibrate your findings

9

I-94 Westbound

Lowry Hill

Tunnel

I-35W SB

On Ramp to

11th Street

TH 280

On Ramp to

Huron Blvd

L07: 4) Usefulness/Value of tool: Has the tool provide useful/meaningful results yet?

10

L07: 5) Suggested tool refinements

11

Congested Traffic

L07: 6) Other comments

12

13

L05: 1) Was the guide helpful in improving programmatic, planning, or project selection processes?

14

L05: 2) For what purposes will your agency utilize the L05 Guide?

Project L02Establishing Monitoring Systems for Travel Time

Reliability

Project C11Improved Economic

Analysis Tools

Project L08Non-Recurrent

Congestion Factors in HCM Methods

Project L07Evaluation of Highway

Design Features to Improve Reliability

Project L05Incorporating Reliability

into Planning & Programming Process

Identifying Prioritizing Institutionalizing

Issues Solutions Reliability

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

10 20 30 40 50 60

L05: 3) Explain the Barriers or challenges to using the guide.4) Does the technical document provide adequate detail?

15

16

L05: 5) Explain the Usefulness/Value of L05 Guide

• Existing performance measures

– Congestion

– Safety

– Bridge Condition

– Pavement Condition

– Reliability (future performance measure?)

17

L05: 6) Suggested refinements

Reliability IndexMeasured

Value

𝑇𝑇𝐼 =𝑇𝑇𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛

𝑇𝑇𝐹𝑟𝑒𝑒𝐹𝑙𝑜𝑤1.08

𝐵𝐼 =𝑇𝑇95% − 𝑇𝑇𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛

𝑇𝑇𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛0.26

On-Time Performance(1.25*FFTT)

92.4%

𝑃𝑇𝐼 =𝑇𝑇95%

𝑇𝑇𝐹𝑟𝑒𝑒𝐹𝑙𝑜𝑤1.36

𝑇𝑇𝐼80% =𝑇𝑇80%

𝑇𝑇𝐹𝑟𝑒𝑒𝐹𝑙𝑜𝑤1.07

𝑀𝐼 =𝑇𝑇97.5%

𝑇𝑇𝐹𝑟𝑒𝑒𝐹𝑙𝑜𝑤1.66

VS.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

10 20 30 40 50

Travel Time (minutes)

None Weather Event Crash

Incident Road Work OtherCombination

18

L05: 6) Other comments