Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
SHRP 2 Reliability Project L38C Pilot Testing of SHRP 2 Reliability Data and Analytical Products: Florida Mohammed Hadi, Yan Xiao, Tao Wang, Pei Hu, and Jianmin Jia Florida International University, Miami Robert Edelstein AECOM, Inc., Miami Alexandra Lopez Florida Department of Transportation, District 6, Miami TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD Washington, D.C. 2015 www.TRB.org
© 2015 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration in cooperation with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. It was conducted in the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2), which is administered by the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies. This project was managed by Reena Mathews, Senior Program Officer for the SHRP 2 Reliability focus area. The authors acknowledge the contributions to the research of various stakeholders who participated in project activities and provided valuable inputs to these activities. In particular, the authors thank participants from the Florida Department of Transportation (DOT) District 6 and District 4 transportation system management and operations programs and transportation management centers, Florida DOT District 6 multimodal system planning office, Miami-Dade Public Works Department, and Florida DOT multimodal performance measurement program and their consultants (AECOM, Jacobs Engineering Group, and Cambridge Systematics). COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. The second Strategic Highway Research Program grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, or FHWA endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing material in this document for educational and not-for-profit purposes will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from SHRP 2. NOTICE The project that is the subject of this document was a part of the second Strategic Highway Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the second Strategic Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.
DISCLAIMER The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this document are those of the researchers who performed the research. They are not necessarily those of the second Strategic Highway Research Program, the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The information contained in this document was taken directly from the submission of the authors. This material has not been edited by the Transportation Research Board. SPECIAL NOTE: This document IS NOT an official publication of the second Strategic Highway Research Program, the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the National Academies.
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. (Dan) Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academyâs purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C.D. (Dan) Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org
Contents 1 Executive Summary 23 CHAPTER 1 Introduction 23 1.1 Background 23 1.2 Tested SHRP 2 Products 30 1.3 Florida DOT Data Analysis Tools 33 1.4 Goal and Objectives 34 1.5 Project Activities and Document Organization 36 CHAPTER 2 Implementation and Evaluation Plan 36 2.1 Considered Business Processes Categories 37 2.2 Identified Business Processes and Associated Stakeholder 50 2.3 Selection of Business Processe 57 2.4 Stakeholder Issues and Needs 57 2.5 Identification of Reliability Performance Measures 59 2.6 Description of Study Facilities 60 2.7 Data Collection 62 2.8 Assessment of Reliability Based on Real-World Data 63 2.9 Testing L07 and L08 Products to Assess Existing Reliability 63 2.10 Identifying Reliability Deficiencies 67 2.11 Assessment of the Identified Strategies Using L07 and L08 67 2.12 Evaluation of the Functionality and Outcomes of the Product Testing 69 CHAPTER 3 Analysis of Existing Reliability Based on Data 69 3.1 Introduction 69 3.2 I-95 Northbound General-Purpose Lane Analysis 124 3.3 Summary of I-95 Northbound General-Purpose Lane Performance 125 3.4 Summary of I-95 Northbound Express Lane Performance 125 3.5 Summary of I-95 Southbound General-Purpose Lane Performance 126 3.6 Summary of I-95 Southbound Express Lane Performance 127 3.7 Summary of SR-7 Northbound Performance 127 3.8 Summary of SR-7 Southbound Performance 129 CHAPTER 4 L07 Product Tests 129 4.1 Introduction and Background 129 4.2 L03 Reliability Models 130 4.3 Data Collection and Analysis 137 4.4 Parameter Estimation Based on Local Conditions 147 4.5 Summary
148 CHAPTER 5 L08 Procedure for Freeway and Urban Street Facilities 148 5.1 Introduction 148 5.2 Freeway Facilities 159 5.3 Urban Street Facilities 185 5.4 Summary 186 CHAPTER 6 Strategies to Address Unreliability 186 6.1 Introduction 186 6.2 Transportation Management Center Operations 193 6.3 SR-7 Corridor Improvement Alternatives 193 6.4 I-95 Implementation Plan 193 6.5 Integrated Corridor Management 195 6.6 Example Assessments of Alternatives Using FREEVAL-RL 202 6.7 Example Assessments of Alternatives Using the L07 Spreadsheet 205 CHAPTER 7 Usability and Acceptability of the Products 205 7.1 Introduction 205 7.2 Research Team Observations 209 7.3 Understandability and Acceptability by Stakeholders 212 7.4 Next Steps 214 References 217 APPENDIX A SHRP 2 Project L38C First Stakeholder Workshop 220 APPENDIX B I-95 Northbound Express Lane 271 APPENDIX C I-95 Southbound General-Purpose Lane 323 APPENDIX D I-95 Southbound Express Lane 332 APPENDIX E SR-7 Northbound 352 APPENDIX F SR-7 Southbound 371 APPENDIX G L38C Updated Research Plan 387 APPENDIX H Second Stakeholder Workshop Meeting Minutes
