SOLICITATION NOTICE
A -- Incorporating Reliability Performance Measures in Operations and Planning Modeling Tools
- Notice Date
- 7/29/2008
- Notice Type
- Combined Synopsis/Solicitation
- NAICS
- 541712
— Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)
- Contracting Office
- The National Academies, Transportation Research Board, Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2), 500 Fifth Street NW, Washington, District of Columbia, 20001
- ZIP Code
- 20001
- Solicitation Number
- SHRP2L04
- Archive Date
- 9/24/2008
- Point of Contact
- William Hyman,, Phone: 202-334-1914, Stephen Andrle,, Phone: 202-334-2810
- E-Mail Address
-
whyman@nas.edu, sandrle@nas.edu
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- SHRP 2 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS Focus Area: Reliability Project Number: L04 Project Title: Incorporating Reliability Performance Measures in Operations and Planning Modeling Tools Date Posted: July 29, 2008 SHRP 2 Background To address the challenges of moving people and goods efficiently and safely on the nation's highways, Congress has created the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2). SHRP 2 is a targeted, short-term research program carried out through competitively awarded contracts to qualified researchers in the academic, private, and public sectors. SHRP 2 addresses four strategic focus areas: the role of human behavior in highway safety (Safety); rapid highway renewal (Renewal); congestion reduction through improved travel time reliability (Reliability); and transportation planning that better integrates community, economic, and environmental considerations into new highway capacity (Capacity). Under current legislative provisions, SHRP 2 will receive approximately $150 million over a total program duration of 7 years. Reliability Focus Area The overall goal of the SHRP 2 Reliability program is to reduce congestion through incident reduction, management, response, and mitigation. Achieving this goal would significantly improve travel time reliability for many types of person and freight trips on the nation's highways. Travel time reliability refers to how travel time varies over time and the impacts of this variance on highway users. In other words, for repeated travel or vehicles making similar trips, there is an underlying distribution of travel time for a particular type of trip within a specific time period between two points. Individual travelers respond differently to the factors and uncertainties associated with the travel time. So do those involved in freight transportation. For important trips, such as a trip to the doctor or a just-in-time freight delivery, the driver (or possibly the freight dispatcher) will build extra time into the trip to ensure arrival within a time window with a high probability, for example 19 out 20 times (95% of the time). A considerable literature is evolving regarding performance measures of travel time reliabilit4y. For example, see the resources on travel time reliability available at the Federal Highway Administration's Operations website: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/tt_reliability/TTR_Report.htm#Whatmeasures. According to previous research, seven major factors account for approximately half of all traffic delay, and therefore, a great deal of the uncertainty associated with travel time: (1) traffic incidents, (2) work zones, (3) weather (4) special events, (5) traffic control devices, (6) fluctuations in demand, and (7) inadequate base capacity. These factors do not always affect travel time reliability separately. They often interact, which increases the challenge of reducing the uncertainty of travel time that drivers experience. Project Background Recent research evidence (see Special Note 1) suggests that travel time reliability is an element of a traveler's choice of departure time, route, mode, and perhaps, whether to travel at all. This implies that traffic conditions influence the demand for and nature of travel. Furthermore, as demand changes, travel conditions, including volumes, change on the network. While as travelers we know this to be true from our experience, traditional methods used to assign traffic to links of the network or forecast travel demand cannot cope with this degree of complexity. In order to make traffic patterns and travel demand forecasting sensitive to traffic conditions, there is a need to develop the underlying relationships between travel time reliability and travel demand and to upgrade analysis and forecasting tools accordingly. A new generation of models and computer analysis offers the potential, but the techniques have yet to be developed. In this Request for Proposals, models that use historical or static data to forecast one or more dimensions of travel are "planning models." Models applied to real time data in order to manage current conditions on the network are "traffic operations models." Simulation models are often categorized into three types: micro-simulation, meso-simulation, and macro-simulation. Micro- and meso-simulation are of most concern here. In micro-simulation, the physical characteristics of vehicles, kinematics of motion, and models of driver behavior are used to move each vehicle in very small increments of time (e.g. second by second). However, ultimately the focus should be on the movement of people, not just vehicles, in order to link the simulation results back to the demand models. Dynamic traffic assignment (DTA) is a type of meso-simulation that can address time varying (dynamic) features of networks but DTA also includes aggregate relationships, such as speed, density, and flow to simplify computation. There are distinct versions of DTA for planning and operations management. The category of travel demand forecasting models includes traditional four-step approaches, discrete choice models, and activity-based approaches. Activity-based models may also include simulation. A fusion is in progress as some approaches to travel demand forecasting are incorporating traffic operations approaches and some traffic operations techniques have demand forecasting capability. There is also extensive on-going work to develop feedback between traffic conditions on the network and travel demand. The emphasis in Project L04 is on improving traffic operations and planning models to reflect travel time reliability and generate travel time reliability as a model output. Phases I and II focus on incorporating travel time reliability in such models. Phase III considers ways to account for the feedback between travel demand and traffic conditions on the network, such as traffic impedances including the variability of travel time. Extensive research and operational testing is underway by many parties on these topics, including related projects in SHRP 2. See Special Note 2. Objectives The objectives of this project are to (1) develop the capability of producing measures of reliability performance as output in traffic simulation models and planning models, and (2) determine how travel demand forecasting models can use reliability measures to produce revised estimates of travel patterns. Tasks Phase I - Background, Functional Requirements, and Representative Data Task 1: Drawing on appropriate sources, identify and synthesize the fundamental issues that reflect the computation and treatment of travel time reliability in modeling tools. Describe primary measures of effectiveness related to travel time reliability. Draw on other SHRP 2 Reliability and Capacity projects. Also, examine work in NCHRP 08-57 and NCHRP 08-67 (See Special Note 3). Task 2: Define the functional requirements of stochastic network simulation models (hereafter referred to as traffic operations models) needed to estimate travel time variability, including but not limited to the following capabilities: • Be able to get travel time distributions by link, segment, trip (O-Ds), and for the entire system. Reflect combinations of recurring and nonrecurring congestion found on real networks. • Be able to quantify the change in travel time due to breakdown in flow (LOS F) • Be able to distinguish and model the variability of (1) recurring congestion (e.g. randomness of travel times in saturated flow), (2) nonrecurring congestion due to fluctuations in demand and the effects of traffic control devices, and (3) nonrecurring congestion due to such factors as incidents, weather, work zones, and special events. • Provide the flexibility to adapt to various agency and policy environments • Be able to replicate operations/traffic control strategies and traveler information systems • Provide calculations of reliability performance measures among the outputs. At a minimum, proposers must address reliability considerations in microscopic simulation models, although mesoscopic simulation models may also be considered within the scope of this project. Task 3: In order to provide meaning to variability in travel time, some baseline is needed. However, in saturated flow conditions, random events introduce variability that may be considered "normal" for the period. This calls for a formal approach to modeling random events. Develop a repeatable framework for evaluating incidents and events. The framework should be able to isolate three regimes: (1) time periods with recurring congestion (2) time periods of nonrecurring congestion due to variation in demand and the effects of traffic control devices; (3) time periods of nonrecurring congestion due to other factors such as incidents, weather, work zones, and special events. Submit a Technical Memorandum covering Tasks 1, 2, and 3. Task 4: Identify good candidate networks and model applications (i.e., simulation software available from vendors that has already been applied by transportation agencies for specific projects) that may be used to satisfy the requirements set out in Task 2. Document how the candidates satisfy the requirements. Consider partnering with one or more local agencies in carrying out the remaining tasks, particularly in Phase II. Task 5: Obtain data from public and/or private sources that can be used in Phase II for developing and implementing a simulation model that satisfies the requirements established in Task 2. The data should provide information on the distribution (i.e. variation) of travel time and other traffic flow variables on network links due to recurring and nonrecurring congestion over a lengthy period of time (six months minimum) and should cover both recurring and nonrecurring congestion on freeways and arterials. Submit a Technical Memorandum covering Tasks 4 and 5. Task 6: Prepare a Phase I Draft Report, including a work plan for Phase II. Revise and submit a Phase I Final Report based on the comments received from SHRP 2. Phase II - Demonstration of a Traffic Simulation Model that Reflects Reliability in a Subarea of a Network and Preparation of Application Guidelines Task 7: Adapt and calibrate an existing traffic simulation model with the functionality described in Phase I and apply it to a reasonably large subarea of an urban network. Alternatively, build and calibrate your own model and similarly apply it. Include in the subarea at least one urban freeway, system interchanges, and surface arterial roads. Make the simulation model internally reflect travel time reliability and produce one or more reliability performance measures as an output. Run the model using different random number seeds and calibrate the basic variability in travel time due to operations at saturation, e.g. recurring congestion. Validate that the model reflects the real-world variability associated with recurring and nonrecurring congestion. Note: If you know of an approach for establishing feedback between traffic conditions on the network and travel demand as discussed in Phase III, feel free to propose it here. We are looking for creativity from proposers. Task 8: Use the inputs and results from earlier tasks to demonstrate the inclusion of travel time reliability in the application of the simulation model in Task 7. Demonstrate the model to practitioners, researchers, operations managers, and planners in transportation agencies and at conferences and meetings. Run scenarios that address the causes of nonrecurring congestion. Show how sensitive the reliability outputs are with respect to key inputs and how traffic flow characteristics are sensitive to reliability. Note: in the proposal describe an outreach plan for the demonstrations. Task 9: Develop Application Guidelines for Incorporating Travel Time Reliability into Traffic Micro-Simulations. The application guidelines should not be software-specific. The guidelines shall be a stand-alone document. Submit a draft. In response to comments received from SHRP 2, submit the Final Application Guidelines. Task 10: Prepare and submit to SHRP 2 a Phase II Draft Report that documents the results of Tasks 7 through 9. Document model calibration and validation consistent with standard practice, for instance as described in either the FHWA or CalTrans Guidelines for Applying Micro-Simulation Software. The Phase II Draft Report should be accompanied by spreadsheets with the analytics, a CD ROM with the software and the models that were run, and geo-coded data where applicable. Include two draft PowerPoint presentations covering Project L04, one for practitioners who adapt and use traffic operations models and the other for planners, operations managers, and decision makers. Document any new intellectual property developed using contract funds (Refer to Manual for Conducting Research and Preparing Proposals for SHRP 2 for information regarding rights in data and intellectual property). Within 30 days SHRP 2 will provide the contractor with comments regarding all the draft deliverables. Incorporate the responses to the comments into the Final Phase II Report and the final versions of all other deliverables and submit them. The Final Phase II Report shall document the results of all project tasks. Phase III - Incorporating Reliability into Travel Demand Forecasting Models and Addressing Feedback with Simulation Models Task 11. There is great interest in linking travel demand forecasting to traffic micro-simulation so that traffic conditions can feed back to choices about travel time, travel route, travel mode, or the decision to travel at all. Describe how a feedback mechanism could incorporate travel time reliability into traditional trip-based travel demand models, emerging activity-based models, and route choice models. Detail how reliability could be introduced into the generalized cost function (may apply to one or more of the following: generation, distribution, mode choice, route choice). In 2009, SHRP 2 Capacity Project C10 will call for proposals from transportation agencies to actually establish part of this linkage, i.e. linking travel demand forecasting to micro-simulation. The product of Task 11--due to exploring feedback relationships between travel forecasting and simulation models--will provide background for Project C10. Prepare a stand-alone Phase III Draft Report on this topic and submit it to SHRP 2 for review. This task does not have to be conducted in sequence with the others. Submit the draft as early in the project as the work permits. SHRP 2 will provide comments within 21 days. Prepare and submit a Final Phase III Report that reflects the comments of SHRP 2. Special Notes Note 1: Brownstone, D., and K.A. Small (2005). Valuing Time and Reliability: Assessing the Evidence from Road Pricing Demonstrations, Transportation Research, 39A, 279-293. Small, K.A., C. Winston and J. Yan (2005). Uncovering the Distribution of Motorists' Preferences for Travel Time and Reliability, Econometrica, 73(4), 1367-1382. H. Wakabayashi et. al. (1999). Effect of Travel Time Reliability on Mode Choice Behavior of Commuters and Travel Behavior Change Before/After Public Service Closure, Proceedings of JSCE, Vol. No. 632, pp. 29-40. E.A. Bogors, H. Van Lint and Henk J. van Zuylen (2008). Travel Time Reliability: Effective Measures from a Behavioral Point of View. TRB 87th Annual Meeting Compendium of Papers DVD, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC. Note 2. Reliability Projects L02 and L03 will strive to gather the data and develop models to characterize travel time reliability at different scales of the highway network. For example, Project L02 will develop a reliability monitoring approach applicable to freeway and arterial segments, corridors, subarea networks, and an entire highway network. Note 3. Project L04 and related projects within the Transportation Research Board are seeking to strengthen simulation tools and demand models. The contractor for Project L04 must be cognizant of and coordinate with related research that is occurring both within SHRP 2 and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). Reliability Project L04 may benefit from the relationships being developed under Reliability Project L03: Analytic Procedures for Determining the Impacts of Reliability Mitigation Strategies, and Reliability Project L02: Establishing Monitoring Programs for Travel Time Reliability. Reliability Project L11: Evaluating Alternative Operations Strategies to Improve Travel Time Reliability will address reliability performance measures and targets for different classes of road users as well as the value of reliability. All these projects are likely to produce inputs into Reliability Project L05: Incorporating Reliability Performance Measures into the Transportation Planning and Programming Processes. Within the SHRP 2 Capacity Focus Area, Project C04: Improving Our Understanding of Highway Users and the Factors Affecting Travel Demand will develop models of user response to congestion, travel time reliability, and pricing. This project should satisfy many of the needs for a new demand modeling framework that addresses reliability, especially if pricing is involved. Capacity Project C05: Understanding the Contributions of Operations, Technology, and Design to Meeting Highway Needs is concerned with combinations of operations-related actions that are equivalent to adding a lane of highway capacity. Capacity Project C05 also involves preparation of guidelines for achieving sustained service rates that are not subject to breakdown in flow, and thus avoid nonrecurring congestion due to the interaction of base capacity and fluctuations in demand. Capacity Project C10: Partnership to Develop an Integrated, Advanced Travel Demand Model and Fine-Grained Time Sensitive Network has substantial resources to refine, strengthen, and expand the scope of models developed in other parts of the Reliability and Capacity focus areas. NCHRP Project 8-57: Improved Framework and Tools for Highway Pricing Decisions, has some relevance to Reliability Project L04 since it will provide an overall approach and key considerations that will address appropriate demand forecasting tools for highway pricing decisions. NCHRP Project 8-67: Integrating Individual Transportation System-Level Performance Programs to Determine Network Performance potentially relates to certain aspects of L04 and other projects in the Reliability research program. Deliverables • Technical Memorandum covering Tasks 1, 2, and 3. • Technical Memorandum covering Tasks 4 and 5. • Phase I Draft Report • Phase I Final Report • Task 8 outreach demonstrations • Draft Application Guidelines • Final Application Guidelines • Phase II Draft Report • Phase II Final Report and supporting documentation (e.g. spreadsheets with the analytics, a CD ROM with the software and the models that were run, and geo-coded data where applicable. Include two draft PowerPoint presentations covering Project L04, one for micro-simulation and travel demand forecasting practitioners and the other for planners, operations managers, and decision makers) • Phase III Draft Report • Phase III Final Report • Three meetings with SHRP 2 staff: Two (2) in Washington, DC and one (1) at the contractor's facility • Semi-annual meetings with the Reliability Technical Coordinating Committee in Washington DC; Irvine, CA; or Woods Hole, MA. • Semi-annual SHRP 2 Reliability contractor coordination meetings at locations to be determined • Telephone conference calls, as needed Funds Available: Not to exceed $1.25 million for the entire project. A potential contractor may propose any budget allocation by phase in order to most effectively achieve the project objectives. Contract Period: Not to exceed thirty-six months (36) months for the entire project. The proposer may establish the length of each phase. Responsible Staff: William Hyman, whyman@nas.edu, 202-334-1914 Note: Urgent questions that arise during August, 2008, should be addressed to Stephen Andrle at sandrle@nas.edu. Authorization to Begin Work: November 2008, anticipated Proposals (20 single-bound copies) are due not later than 4:30 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST) on September 9, 2008 This is a firm deadline, and extensions simply are not granted. In order to be considered, all 20 copies of the agency's proposal accompanied by the executed, unmodified Liability Statement must be in our offices not later than the deadline shown, or they will be rejected. Delivery Address: PROPOSAL-SHRP 2 ATTN: Neil F. Hawks Director, Strategic Highway Research Program 2 Transportation Research Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 Phone: 202-334-1430 Liability Statement The signature of an authorized representative of the proposing agency is required on the unaltered Liability Statement in order for SHRP 2 to accept the agency's proposal for consideration. Proposals submitted without this executed and unaltered statement by the proposal deadline will be summarily rejected. An executed, unaltered statement indicates the agency's intent and ability to execute a contract that includes the provisions in the statement. The Liability Statement is Figure 1 in the Manual for Conducting Research and Preparing Proposals for SHRP 2 ( http://trb.org/shrp2/SHRPII_Instructions.asp ) (see General Note 4). Here is a printable version of the SHRP 2 Liability Statement ( http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/LiabilityStatement.pdf ). A free copy of the Adobe Acrobat PDF reader is available at http://www.adobe.com. General Notes 1. According to the provisions of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21, which relates to nondiscrimination in federally assisted programs, all parties are hereby notified that the contract entered into pursuant to this announcement will be awarded without discrimination on the grounds of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or disability. 2. The essential features required in a proposal for research are detailed in the brochure entitled A Manual for Conducting Research and Preparing Proposals for SHRP 2 ( http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/PreparingSHRP2Reports.pdf ). Proposals must be prepared according to this document, and attention is directed specifically to Section IV for mandatory requirements. Proposals that do not conform with these requirements will be rejected. 3. The total funds available are made known in the project statement, and line items of the budget are examined to determine the reasonableness of the allocation of funds to the various tasks. If the proposed total cost exceeds the funds available, the proposal is rejected. 4. All proposals become the property of the Transportation Research Board. Final disposition will be made according to the policies thereof, including the right to reject all proposals. 5. Proposals will be evaluated by SHRP 2 staff and Expert Task Groups (ETGs) consisting of individuals collectively very knowledgeable in the problem area. Selection of an agency is made by the SHRP 2 Oversight Committee, based on the recommendation from SHRP 2 staff and the ETG. The following factors are considered: (1) the proposer's demonstrated understanding of the problem; (2) the merit of the proposed research approach and experimental design; (3) the experience, qualifications, and objectivity of the research team in the same or closely related problem area; (4) the proposer's plan for participation by disadvantaged business enterprises-small firms owned and controlled by minorities or women; and (5) the adequacy of facilities. 6. Any clarifications regarding this RFP will be posted on the SHRP 2 Web site at ( www.trb.org/shrp2 ). Announcements of such clarifications will be posted on the front page and, when possible, will be noted in the TRB e-newsletter. Proposers are advised to check the Web site frequently until August 26, 2008, when no further comments will be posted. 7. A bidder's proposal is required to set out a management plan and a plan for quality control/quality assurance (QC/QA). The management plan should identify a person responsible for overall performance of the project, typically an officer of the prime contractor, and who has the authority to take corrective action; the Principal Investigator and any Co-Principal Investigators; an organizational structure of the team with a description of the organizing principles; where and in what manner the key staff and experts will be applied to functions or tasks of the project; how coordination of subcontractors and sub-consultants will be achieved; management of resources (budget, labor, equipment); and schedule adherence. The QC/QA plan should address how quality will be built in as the tasks are being executed and describe the oversight necessary to assure the quality of the products of the tasks and phases once they are largely complete. 8. The contractor is responsible for transfer of all electronic content of deliverables (word processing files, CDs, simulation runs, software) so it can be archived. SHRP 2 intends to establish procedures for transferring both structured and unstructured project data so it can be archived and disseminated. SHRP Project L13, Requirements and Feasibility of a System for Archiving and Disseminating data from SHRP 2 Reliability and Related Studies will determine if building an archive for all the Reliability and related research projects ought to occur. The initial requirements and feasibility study may provide a specification for transferring Reliability project data to a temporary repository. IMPORTANT NOTICE Potential proposers should understand that the research project described herein is tentative. The final content of the program depends on the level of funding made available. Nevertheless, to be prepared to execute research contracts as soon as possible after sponsors' approvals, the Strategic Highway Research Program is assuming that the tentative program will become official in its entirety and is proceeding with requests for proposals and selections of research agencies.
- Web Link
-
FedBizOpps Complete View
(https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=039ec6c5ac00c9b45d83008a4171a767&tab=core&_cview=1)
- Record
- SN01626237-W 20080731/080729230429-039ec6c5ac00c9b45d83008a4171a767 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |