Home > CSC-OpenAccess Library > Manuscript Information
EXPLORE PUBLICATIONS BY COUNTRIES |
EUROPE | |
MIDDLE EAST | |
ASIA | |
AFRICA | |
............................. | |
United States of America | |
United Kingdom | |
Canada | |
Australia | |
Italy | |
France | |
Brazil | |
Germany | |
Malaysia | |
Turkey | |
China | |
Taiwan | |
Japan | |
Saudi Arabia | |
Jordan | |
Egypt | |
United Arab Emirates | |
India | |
Nigeria |
A New Paradigm in User Equilibrium-Application in Managed Lane Pricing
Asapol Sinprasertkool, Siamak Ardekani, Stephen P. Mattingly
Pages - 73 - 101 | Revised - 31-03-2011 | Published - 04-04-2011
Published in International Journal of Engineering (IJE)
MORE INFORMATION
KEYWORDS
Managed Lanes, User Equilibrium, Pricing Policy
ABSTRACT
Ineffective use of the High-Occupancy-Vehicle (HOV) lanes has the potential to decrease the overall roadway throughput during peak periods. Excess capacity in HOV lanes during peak periods can be made available to other types of vehicles, including single occupancy vehicles (SOV) for a price (toll). Such dual use lanes are known as “Managed Lanes.” The main purpose of this research is to propose a new paradigm in user equilibrium to predict the travel demand for determining the optimal fare policy for managed lane facilities. Depending on their value of time, motorists may choose to travel on Managed Lanes (ML) or General Purpose Lanes (GPL). In this study, the features in the software called Toll Pricing Modeler version 4.3 (TPM-4.3) are described. TPM-4.3 is developed based on this new user equilibrium concept and utilizes it to examine various operating scenarios. The software has two built-in operating objective options: 1) what would the ML operating speed be for a specified SOV toll, or 2) what should the SOV toll be for a desired minimum ML operating speed.
A number of pricing policy scenarios are developed and examined on the proposed managed lane segment on Interstate 30 (I-30) in Grand Prairie, Texas. The software provides quantitative estimates of various factors including toll revenue, emissions and system performance such as person movement and traffic speed on managed and general purpose lanes. Overall, among the scenarios examined, higher toll rates tend to generate higher toll revenues, reduce overall CO and NOx emissions, and shift demand to general purpose lanes. On the other hand, HOV preferential treatments at any given toll level tend to reduce toll revenue, have no impact on or reduce system performance on managed lanes, and increase CO and NOx emissions.
1 | Olyai, K., & Ardekani, S. A. (2013). A Feasibility Study for Converting HOV Lanes to Managed Lanes in Dallas, Texas. In Transportation Research Board 92nd Annual Meeting (No. 13-2022). |
2 | Abou-Senna, H. A. (2012). Microscopic Assessment of Transportation Emissions on Limited Access Highways (Doctoral dissertation, University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida). |
3 | Ardekani, S., Ghandehari, M., & Nepal, S. (2011). Macroscopic speed-flow models for characterization of freeway and managed lanes. Institutul Politehnic din Iasi. Buletinul. Sectia Constructii. Arhitectura Vol, 57, 140-160. |
A. Yerramalla. “Vehicular Emissions Models Using MOBILE6.2 and Field Data”. Master of Science Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Texas at Arlington, Texas, 2007 | |
B. Greenshields. “A Study of Traffic Capacity”. Proceedings of the Highway Research Board, Highway Research Board, Washington D.C., Vol. 14, pp. 468-477, 1933 | |
B. Kuhn, G. Goodin, A. Ballard, M. Brewer, R. Brydia, J. Carson, S. Chrysler, T. Collier, K. Fitzpatrick, D. Jasek, C. Toycen and G. Ullman. “Managed Lanes Handbook”. Texas Transportation Institute, The Texas A&M University System, College Station, Texas, 2005 | |
Ben Leslie, Carl van Schaik and Gernot Heiser, “Wombat: a portable user-mode Linux for embedded systems”, Proceedings of the 6th Linux Conference Australia, Canberra, April, 2005. | |
C. Sharp, K. Button and D. Deadman. “The Economics of Tolled Road Crossings”. Journal of Transportation Economics and Policy, Vol. 20(2), pp. 255-274. 1986 | |
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. and Short-Elliott-Hendrickson, Inc. “I-394 MNPASS Technical Evaluation: Final Report”. Project report to the Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota, 2006 | |
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. and URS Corporation. “MNPASS System Study: Final Report”. Project report to the Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota, 2005 | |
Comparing Linux and Minix, |
|
D. Brownstone, A. Ghosh, T. F. Golob, C. Kazimi and D. V. Amelsfort. “Drivers’ Willingnessto- Pay to Reduce Travel Time: Evidence from the San Diego 1-15 Congestion Pricing Project”. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 37, Issue 4, pp. 373-387, May 2003 | |
D. G. Goodin, M. W. Burris, C. M. Dusza, D. H. Ungemah, J. Li, S. A. Ardakani and S. P. Mattingly. “Role of Preferential Treatment of Carpools in Managed Lane Facilities”. Texas Transportation Institute, The Texas A&M University System, College Station, Texas, Project Summary Report 0-5286-2, 2009 | |
D. H. Kang and W. Stockton. “Estimation of Toll Road Users Value of Time”. Texas Transportation Institute, The Texas A&M University System, College Station, Texas, Report No. SWUTC/08/473700-00084-1, 2008 | |
Daniel P. Bovet & Macro Cesati. “Understanding the Linux Kernel”. O’REILLY Press, Nov 2005. | |
E. Sullivan. “Continuation Study to Evaluate the Impacts of the SR91 Value-Priced Express Lanes: Final Report”. Project report to the California Department of Transportation, Traffic Operation Program, HOV System Branch, Sacramento, CA, 2000 | |
ERTOS Website |
|
Federal Highway Administration “Managed Lanes: A Primer”. U.S. Department of Transportation, 2008 | |
Floating Point Unit, |
|
FTP of Unixbench |
|
G. Fielding and D. Klein. “High Occupancy/Toll Lanes: Phasing in Congestion Pricing a Lane at a Time”. Policy Study No. 170, Reason Foundation, Los Angeles, 1993 | |
G. Ragazzi. “Tolls and Project Financing: a Critical View”. Research in Transportation Economics, Vol. 15(1), pp. 41-53, 2005 | |
H. Hartig, M. Hohmuth, J. Liedtke, S. Schänberg, J. Wolter, “The Performance of ?-Kernel-based Systems”, 16th SOSP TU Dresden, Fakultat Informatik, Heft Jan 1997. | |
Hbench-OS Operating system Benchmarks |
|
J. D. Fricker and R. K. Whitford. “Fundamentals of Transportation Engineering: A Multimodal Systems Approach”. Pearson Prentice Hall, 2004 | |
J. G. Wardrop. “Some Theoretical Aspects of Road Traffic Research”. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Part II, Vol. I, pp. 325-362, 1952 | |
J. Li, S. Govind, J. C. Williams, S. A. Ardekani and C. R. Richard. “Assessing Pricing Strategies and Users’ Attitudes Towards Managed Lanes: Executive Summary”. Project Summary Report 4009-S, 2002 | |
J. S. Drake, J. L. Schofer and A. D. May. “A Statistical Analysis of Speed Density Hypotheses”. Highway Research Record, Vol. 154, Highway Research Board, NRC, Washington, 1967 | |
J. Supernak, J. M. Golob, K. Kawada and T. F. Goob. “San Diego’s I-15 Congestion Pricing Project – Preliminary Findings”. Paper presented at the 78th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1999 | |
J. T. Berg, K. Kawada, M. Burris, C. Swenson, L. Smith and E. Sullivan. “Value Pricing Pilot Program”. TR News 204, pp. 3-10, 1999 | |
M. E. Gross and M. J. Garvin. “Approaches for Structuring Concession Lengths and Toll Rates for Transportation Infrastructure PPPs”. Proceedings of the Construction Research Congress, pp. 191-200, 2009 | |
M. Hickman, Q. Brown and A. Miranda. “An Evaluation of the Demand for the Katy Freeway HOV lane Value Pricing Project”. Paper presented at the 79th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2000 | |
M. Swisher, W. L. Eisele, D. Ungemah and G. D. Goodin. “Life-Cycle Graphical Representation of Managed HOV Lane Evolution”. Submitted for the 11th International HOV conference, Seattle, Washington, October 2002 | |
M. W. Burris and E. Sullivan. “Benefit-Cost Analysis of Variable Pricing Projects: QuickRide HOT Lanes”. Journal of Transportation Engineering, pp. 183- 190, March 2006 | |
M. W. Burris, M. C. Pietrzyk and C. R. Swenson. “Observed Traffic Pattern Changes Due to the Introduction of Variable Tolls”. Paper presented at the 79th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2000 | |
NCTCOG. “Managed Lanes: Improved Mobility Through Choice”. North Central Texas Council of Governments, 2009 | |
Parsons Brinckerhoff “Regional toll revenue feasibility study”. Working draft prepared for Washington State Department of Transportation Urban Corridors Office, 2002 | |
R. He, B. Ran, K. Choi and A. L. Kornhauser. “Evaluation of Value Pricing Using a Multiclass Dynamic Network Model”. Journal of Transportation Engineering, ASCE, pp. 617-624, November/December 2003 | |
Release Notes of MINIX 3.1.3 - Developer's Interim Release, |
|
S. A. Ardekani, F. Kashefi, K. Abdelghany, and A. Hassan. “User Guide to Toll Pricing Model v3.1: TPM-3.1”. 2007 | |
S. M. Nepal. “Traffic Flow Models for Freeway Traffic Operation”. Master of Science Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Texas at Arlington, Texas, 2008 | |
S. P. Mattingly, A. Upayokin and J. Li. “A Driver’s Dilemma: Main Lane or HOT Lane”. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Decision Making in Urban and Civil Engineering, 2004 | |
USEPA (2009). “MOBILE6 Vehicle Emission Modeling Software”. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, Website available at: http://www.epa.gov/OMS/m6.htm. [Accessed: November 29, 2009] | |
USEPA (2009). “Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES)”. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Website available at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/moves/index.htm. [Accessed: November 29, 2009] | |
WSA. “Level 2 Traffic and Toll Revenue Study: IH 30 Reversible Managed Lanes- June 2007”. Wilbur Smith Associates, 2007 | |
Y. Yin and Y. Lou. “Dynamic Tolling Strategies for Managed Lanes”. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 135, No. 2, pp. 45-52, 2009 | |
Dr. Asapol Sinprasertkool
University of Texas at Arlington - United States of America
asapol.sinprasertkool@mavs.uta.edu
Dr. Siamak Ardekani
University of Texas at Arlington - United States of America
Dr. Stephen P. Mattingly
University of Texas at Arlington - United States of America
|
|
|
|
View all special issues >> | |
|
|