CHAPTER 5

SOFTWARE SYSTEMS
AND SIMULATION FOR
TRANSPORTATION
APPLICATIONS
Elena Shenk Prassas
Department of Civil Engineering
Polytechnic University
Brooklyn, New York

The time has long passed when signal optimization was done by physical time-space boards or when
traffic assignment models were executed overnight on a mainframe computer. Software systems are
now the basic components of a professional transportation engineers arsenal and just about every
professional transportation study uses software in its analysis.
Thanks to massive advances in computing and communications technology, we now live in an
era in which much data can be downloaded electronically, transmitted wirelessly, and presented
in summary reports and visuals by automated processes. In traffic control, data availability in real
time is a reality. Sophisticated computer programs aid computation, signal optimization, and net-
work assignments. This includes dynamic traffic assignments, responsive to incidents and events.
Networks are routinely modeled and simulated at the microscopic level. The emphasis on intelligent
transportation systems (ITS) has raised the level of both technological capability and public expecta-
tion. Global positioning systems (GPS), geographic information systems (GIS), pervasive cellular
telephones, and electronic toll collection systems are no longer considered new technologies but
common tools.
At the same time, much of the sensing is still done by road tubes, albeit linked to sophisticated
devices, and integration of these varied technological capabilities into a seamless system of informa-
tion is now less of a challenge. The very power and sophistication of some computational tools has
led to a new generation of planning-level estimators, consistent with the newer operational tools.
The purpose of this chapter is to provide some information on the span of software systems
available to practicing engineers and planners. Because of the abundance of software applications in
all areas of transportation, most of the emphasis here is on traffic operations tools, and particularly
simulation.
An excellent reference concerning the tools available for traffic analysis is the FHWA Traffic
Analysis Toolbox1-9, a nine-volume reference set on the various types of traffic analysis tools. One
of the first and most daunting question a transportation professional faces is deciding what software
type to use, so Volumes I and II describe the purpose, capabilities, and use of the different tools
available to transportation professionals.1,2 Volumes III and IV are specific to microscopic simula-
tion and give guidelines for its use, in general,3 and for the use of the CORSIM10 simulation model,
in particular.4 Volume V presents real-world case studies that show which tools are applied and how

5.1
5.2 NETWORKS AND SYSTEMS

they can be used effectively.5 Volume VI discusses measures of effectiveness and how to interpret
results.6 Volume VII discusses how to predict performance using traffic analysis tools,7 and Volumes
VIII and IX are specific to using simulation in work zones.8,9

5.1 COMPUTATIONAL SOFTWARE VERSUS SIMULATION

SOFTWARE

It is important to understand the difference between the different types of software tools and their
purpose, and the difference between computational tools versus simulation. If an equation or algo-
rithm is well-defined but being executed by computer for speed or efficiency, it is a computational
tool; if subsystems are modeled, randomness introduced, and the subsystems linked, then it is generally
a simulation tool.
In this spirit, the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)11 is a collection of computational procedures
that are being realized in a set of computational tools, such as HCS12 and Signal 2000.13 The HCM
is a collection of deterministic procedures for predicting capacity, delay, speed, queues, and other
measures of effectiveness (MOE) for the various types of transportation facilities, such as freeways,
signalized and unsignalized intersections, arterials, and roundabouts. The HCM procedures are best
used for light to moderately congested facilities. They are relatively quick and easy to use, but many
of the procedures can no longer be done by hand. For instance, the HCM 2010 signalized intersec-
tion methodology, and arterial methodology now incorporates iterative models that preclude hand
calculations.
A number of signal optimization programs, including TRANSYT-7F14 and PASSER,15 are also
computational tools because they are based on deterministic models and will always produce the same
result, that is, there is no randomness introduced. Some optimization programs, such as TRANSYT-7F,
also include a macroscopic simulation model for predicting platoon dispersion, queue spillback, and
actuated control simulation.16 Some tools combine capacity (HCM-based models) and signal optimi-
zation, such as SIG/Cinema,17 Synchro/SimTraffic,18 and TEAPAC Complete.19
One of the earliest simulation tools was the UTCS-1,20 prepared for the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) as part of the Urban Traffic Control System testbed in Washington, DC,
dating to the late 1960s. This was a true microsimulation, in that such subsystems as turning, speed
selection, car-following, and lane selection were modeled stochastically, calibrated individually, and
then incorporated into a system that simulated traffic movements on arterials and in networks at a
microscopic (i.e., individual vehicle) level.
This tool later evolved into NETSIM,21 and was validated over the years at the macro level of overall
network flows, speeds, and delay. An analogous tool was developed for traffic on freeways, and aptly
named FRESIM.22 These were both integrated under the direction of FHWA into a corridor tool,
CORSIM,10 and combined with a user-friendly interface and an animation program for viewing the
results, into one package called TSIS.23 Other corridor tools, such as WATSIM,24 have been produced
as competing products, as have such traffic simulators as VISSIM,25 Paramics,26 and Aimsun.27
The TEAPAC Complete19 package has, in addition, organized the links between various computa-
tional and simulation models. It includes pre- and postprocessors for many of the software programs
listed above, such as TRANSYT-7F, CORSIM, and VISSIM, thus making it easy to run the various
levels of models with one input data set. Figure 5.1 shows a diagram of the TEAPAC Complete
system, and the relation to other tools.

5.2 IMPORTANT AREAS AND TOOLS NOT COVERED

This chapter does not address a host of transportation computational tools and software available in the
profession: transit scheduling and routing algorithms; travel demand models, such as TransCAD,28
which combines GIS and transportation modeling; commercial vehicle route selection; or dynamic
routing, just to name a few.
 One Program
Time- Time- Nu- HCS2000
Jamar Titan Does it All!
Mark lapse Metrics HCS+

Counts Warrants HCM Capacity Analysis/Optimization - up to 500 intersections per analysis Progression
- turn count - MUTCD 2000/03 - HCM 2000 capacity analysis and satflows - best level of service for traffic - bandwidth
tabulation signal and - optimization of timings (green & cycle) impact studies & improvements progression
- peak period multi-way stop - optimization of phasings - satflows & best phasing-timings for - system cycle
analysis warrant analysis - geometric design of lane widths and usage PASSER/TRANSYT/CORSIM/SYNCHRO, etc. optimization

Scenario TED Editor

Manager LANES TIMINGS - data file
- customized, multi- VOLUMES GEOMETRY NETWORK SATFLOWS PHASING OFFSETS editor
variable, multi-issue - script/batch
scenario manager - existing - existing - connections - estimated - existing - existing file creation
- automated script - projected - proposed - layout - calibrated - optimum - optimum - advanced
creation for multi- tutorial
function analyses

Traffic Impact Export/Import for: VISSIM - CORSIM - TRU-TRAFFIC - PASSER - TRANSYT - SYNCRHO - NOSTOP
TIA - trip generation - easy data input for VISSIM, CORSIM, TS/PP-DRAFT, PASSER II-02, TRANSYT-7F, SYNCHRO/SIMTRAFFIC & NOSTOP
helper - on-screen - seamless data exchange between TEAPAC and all seven programs - up to 500 nodes
assignment - 1-click access to: animations of CORSIM, VISSIM & SIMTRAFFIC; graphical displays of TS/PP-DRAFT, CORSIM & Designed for
- multi-use sites SYNCHRO; optimizations of PASSER, TRANSYT & SYNCHRO - option to import results & send to all other functions Windows
Windows 7
Vista
XP
VISSIM CORSIM TRU-TRAFFIC SYNCHRO 2000
PASSER-II TRANSYT-7F
VISUM NETSIM TS/PP-DRAFT SIMTRAFFIC

15 Timber Lane
Northbrook, Illinois
U.S.A. 60062-3715
www.StrongConcepts.com Key:
info@StrongConcepts.com Input TEAPAC Output
(847) 564-0386 fax: 474-4486 First in integrated traffic software Application
data data
Strong concepts 35 Years function

FIGURE 5.1 TEAPAC Complete and its linkages for an integrated system.
5.3
5.4 NETWORKS AND SYSTEMS

5.3 TRAFFIC SOFTWARE SYSTEMS

There are national FHWA-designated software distribution centers, notably McTrans at the University
of Florida (http://mctrans.ce.ufl.edu) and PC-TRANS at Kansas University (www.kutc.ku.edu/pctrans).
Originally funded by FHWA during their startup phase, they now exist based upon software sales
and related services.
To appreciate the range of software products available to the user community, note the categories
listed on the two Web sites just cited:

s (IGHWAYENGINEERING
s #ONSTRUCTIONMANAGEMENT
s $EMANDMODELING
s %NVIRONMENTALENGINEERING
s 'ENERALTRAFFIC
s (IGHWAYDESIGN
s (IGHWAYHYDRAULICS
s (IGHWAYSURVEYING
s -APPINGAND')3
s .ETWORKASSIGNMENT
s 0AVEMENTSMAINTENANCE
s 0LANNINGDATA
s 0ROJECTMANAGEMENT
s 3AFETYANDACCIDENTS
s 3IGNALTIMINGSIGNALWARRANTS
s 3ITEANALYSIS
s 3TRUCTURALENGINEERING
s 4RAFFICDATA
s 4RAFFICMAINTENANCE
s 4RAFFICSIMULATION
s 4RANSITOPERATIONS
s 4RANSITPLANNING

Of this list, this chapter limits its attention primarily to traffic simulation, and to some extent, signal
timing, and capacity analysis.

5.4 BASICS OF SIMULATION

Simulation is used extensively in traffic engineering. Simulation can be divided into three categories:
macroscopic simulation, mesoscopic simulation, and microscopic simulation.
Macroscopic simulation models, unlike microscopic ones, do not replicate the movements of the
individual vehicles in the traffic stream. Rather, platoons of vehicles are modeled, using deterministic
algorithms for the speed-flow-density relationship. Macroscopic simulation (sometimes also called
continuous flow simulation) is somewhat less data intensive than microscopic models. Figure 5.2
shows an output from the macroscopic simulation model in TRANSYT-7F, which shows a detailed
flow profile for a specific node and traffic movement. A similar flow profile can be shown for any
 SOFTWARE SYSTEMS AND SIMULATION FOR TRANSPORTATION APPLICATIONS 5.5

FIGURE 5.2 Macroscopic simulation of traffic flow. [Source: http://mctrans.ce.ufl.edu/featured/TRANSYT-7F/Release11/MacroSim.htm]

traffic movement and time period; and the software could also show queue length profiles for any
traffic movement and time period. This type of output could not be obtained from a computational
tool, such as the HCM.
Microscopic simulation models replicate as closely as possible the movements of the indi-
vidual vehicles in the traffic stream. There are submodels for the various driver behaviors for
responding to external stimuli that are linked together to reproduce the traffic stream. There are no
deterministic algorithms for predicting the measures of effectiveness. Rather, data is gathered as
the vehicles move along the facility, given that the program knows exactly where each vehicle is
at each second (or subsecond). The models and capabilities of microsimulation will be discussed
in detail later in the chapter. Microsimulation models can, in addition, show realistic animations
of the movement of vehicles on the facility or network, since only with microsimulation do you
have all the detailed information on the position of each individual vehicle at each second. Some
microscopic simulation programs also replicate pedestrian behavior and the interaction between
pedestrians and vehicles.
Mesoscopic simulation combines features from both macroscopic and microscopic simulation.
Mesoscopic models do simulate the individual vehicle, however with aggregated behavior on the
travel links, so there will be a simpler car following and lane changing model. Then, rather than
moving the simulation clock ahead each second (or subsecond) and knowing where each individual
5.6 NETWORKS AND SYSTEMS

vehicle is every second, the model will work off of key events and move the simulation clock ahead
to the next key event. Mesoscopic models are useful for very large networks; the problem or focus
areas can be simulated at a microscopic level while the other areas can be more aggregated. Aimsun 6,
for instance, incorporates both a microscopic and mesoscopic simulator. Mesoscopic simulators
are becoming more common as larger networks with more real-time information are being simu-
lated and evaluated. As the nation increasingly uses intelligent transportation systems for planning
and operating our highway networks, traffic assignment and planning is done at the same time as
operations analysis. For example, DYNASMART-P, which stands for Dynamic Network Assignment
Simulation Model for Advanced Roadway Telematics (Planning version), supports both transporta-
tion network planning and operational analyses, including the evaluation of ITS systems, but it does
not include detailed models for car-following and lane-changing.30 Reference 31 lists the following
applications for this program:

s !SSESSINGIMPACTSOF)43ANDNON )43TECHNOLOGIESONTHETRANSPORTATIONNETWORK
s 3UPPORTINGDECISION MAKINGFORWORK ZONEPLANNINGANDTRAFFICMANAGEMENT
s %VALUATING(/6AND(/4LANES
s %VALUATINGCONGESTIONPRICINGSCHEMES
s 0LANNINGFORSPECIALEVENTSANDEMERGENCIES
s !SSIGNINGTRAFFICINTHETRADITIONALFOUR STEPPROCESS

Two other models that include a mesoscopic simulator are DynaMIT32 and DYNASMART-X,
both of which integrate historical databases and real-time inputs. These tools were designed to sup-
port ATIS (Advanced Traveler Information Systems) and ATMS (Advanced Traveler Management
Systems) applications at a traffic management center (TMC). They provide information for traffic
engineers to make proactive decisions based on real-time information and scenarios. References 31
and 32 list the following applications for these two programs:

s 'ENERATINGUNBIASEDANDCONSISTENTINFORMATIONTODRIVERS
s %FFICIENTOPERATINGOF6ARIABLE-ESSAGE3IGNS
s /FF LINEEVALUATIONOFREAL TIMEINCIDENTMANAGEMENTSTRATEGIES
s 2EAL TIMEINCIDENTMANAGEMENTANDCONTROL
s %VALUATINGALTERNATIVETRAFFICSIGNALANDRAMPMETERINGOPERATIONALSTRATEGIES
s #OORDINATINGEVACUATIONANDREAL TIMEEMERGENCIESTHATCOULDBLOCKHIGHWAYLINKS
s /PTIMIZINGTHEOPERATIONOF4-#SWITHREAL TIMEPREDICTIONS
s 'ENERATINGREAL TIMESIGNALCONTROLSTRATEGIES
s !4)3APPLICATIONS
s 'ENERATING CONGESTION PRICING SCHEMES FOR VARYING LOCATIONS TIMES AND PREVAILING NETWORK
state

These types of dynamic traffic management systems are the future of transportation. They use
real-time information and origin-destination information, as well as simulation models, to predict
network conditions and thus make it possible to analyze the effects of various traffic management
decisions or traffic control measures. Such dynamic systems can also provide better traveler infor-
mation, which can then optimize route choice and reduce congestion and delays because they use
real-time information obtained from loop detectors and/or roadside sensors and from GPS-equipped
vehicles.31
Table 5.1 is a portion of a table taken from Volume II of the FHWA Traffic Analysis Toolbox.
It shows the types of facilities that can generally be analyzed with the different types of simulation
models.
 SOFTWARE SYSTEMS AND SIMULATION FOR TRANSPORTATION APPLICATIONS 5.7

TABLE 5.1 Relevance of Tool with Respect to Facility Type

Macroscopic Mesoscopic Microscopic

Facility type simulation simulation simulation

Isolated intersection u u u
Roundabout & / &
Arterial u u u
Highway u u u
Freeway u u u
HOV lane u u u
HOV bypass lane & & u
Ramp u u u
Auxiliary lane u u u
Reversible lane / / &
Truck lane & / u
Bus lane & / u
Toll plaza / / u
Light-rail lane / / u
/ The tool does not generally address the specific context.
& Some tools do and some do not address the specific context.
u The tool does generally address the specific context.
Source: From Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume II: Decision Support Methodology for
Selecting Traffic Analysis Tools, June 2004, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/trafficanalysistools/tat_vol2/
index.html

5.5 MICROSCOPIC SIMULATION MODELS

As mentioned earlier, microsimulation involves modeling the behavior of individual vehicles, but
what this really means is modeling the behavior of people, by replicating the responses of drivers to
stimuli in the real world. People make decisions differently, they drive differently from one another,
and this variability in driving characteristics is modeled.
In microsimulation, the detailed movements of each vehicle in the traffic stream are represented,
that is, the model calculates the detailed trajectory of each vehicle, defining its speed and location
at each second (or subsecond). Microsimulators model how the driver responds to the vehicle that is
directly ahead with a car following model. There is a lane-changing model that replicates the drivers
decision whether to change lanes and how to do it safely. All the ways that the driver responds to
perceived stimuli are modeled, and since the behavior of any two drivers is never identical, the model
must access statistical distributions to quantify specific human responses. For example, in CORSIM,
when each vehicle enters the network a random number is generated that defines the driver as being
somewhere on a distribution that ranges from very timid to very aggressive. This vehicle (driver) will
carry this designation for its entire trip. Then when this vehicle is faced with a decision to make a
permitted left turn, for instance, depending upon the driver characteristic that it was assigned, it will
accept a small gap if it is an aggressive driver and will wait for a larger gap if it is a timid driver.33
An important benefit of simulation is that it can bring the real-world environment into the office.
Because of the level of detail, simulation can provide insights that are not available from any other
source. It is a tool that can be used to test various ideas and designs relatively inexpensively; because
of the ability to show the results in animation, it also can be used to display these ideas to the client.

5.5.1 Random Number Generation

The most basic feature of simulation is randomness, and yet digital computers are deterministic by
their very nature. How then does one generate random numbers on a computer?
5.8 NETWORKS AND SYSTEMS

The answer is that one creates a computer code that generates a sequence of numbers that appear
to be random. In fact, there is a pattern, but it repeats only after millions of numbers. Sequential
numbers in the chain do not appear to be correlated to each other even with rather sophisticated
statistical techniques. These pseudorandom number generators are now used extensively and are
rather sophisticated in masking the underlying relation. Indeed, they are so routine that spreadsheets
now incorporate random-number-generating capabilities.
In many applications, the user can specify a starting or seed number for the chain. By specifying
a different number, the user picks up the chain in a different place for each choice.
The user can also specify the same number, and be assured that exactly the same numbers are gen-
erated in exactly the same pattern. This is extremely useful when one wishes to see how two different
control policies affect exactly the same traffic, something that is impossible in the real world.
From a statistical point of view, it also allows paired t-tests to be run on the performance data
from a set of N replications under two different control policies, if the same set of N different seed
numbers is used in the N runs for each policy.
It is rather natural to think of moving ahead in discrete steps of time, say one second into the
future. With knowledge of vehicle speeds and positions, a car-following relation, a lane-changing
rule, and certain other rules, we can then simulate the next positions (and speeds) of individual
vehicles. We can also estimate whether a new vehicle entered the system in each entry lane on each
link. Further, we can gather information needed for the performance indices and vehicle trajectories.
This approach is called discrete time-based simulation.

5.5.2 Modeling the Mechanisms

The first issue is actually enumerating the mechanisms of the proposed simulation model and defin-
ing their interactions. When this is done, it is then necessary to model the individual mechanisms,
link them, use them, and refine them in some iterative process that introduces reality. Consider the
simple case of traffic traveling on an arterial. The primary mechanisms might be:

s 6EHICLEARRIVES
s 6EHICLETRAVELSINLANEATDESIREDSPEED
s 6EHICLEINTERACTSWITHOTHERSCAR FOLLOWING
s 6EHICLECHANGESLANEORNOT/VERTAKING4URNING7HEN7HY
s 3IGNALINDICATIONINFLUENCESVEHICLE
s 6EHICLEDECELERATES
s 6EHICLEACCELERATES

This simplified list does not include the ways in which the vehicle may interact with pedestrians,
buses, geometrics (grade of road, for instance), weather, or sun glare. Nor does the above list include
the ways in which cross traffic is considered, or many other factors.
Nonetheless, having defined these basic mechanisms, the immediate challenge is then to establish
the details of the mechanisms, the links to other mechanisms (because they are generally interdepen-
dent), and the calibration/validation data needs.
Moreover, there must be a guiding principle that anticipates the uses to which the model will
be put. This is often elusive, because users find new applications and because the state of the art
changes. Nonetheless, the need exists.
Consider the simple decision to affix an identifying tag to each vehicle as it enters the network,
which it retains as it moves through the network. This allows: (1) future applications to assign a route
to that particular vehicle, and to update that route periodically; (2) desired speed and accel/decel pat-
terns to be linked to that vehicle; (3) location data to be stored at each increment of time, allowing
trajectories to be reconstructed. Without such an identity tag, the same vehicle might bounce through
the network by Brownian motion, subject to a series of random turn decisions (with the turn percent-
age being a characteristic of the intersection), with no meaningful path information recoverable.
 SOFTWARE SYSTEMS AND SIMULATION FOR TRANSPORTATION APPLICATIONS 5.9

Some of the mechanisms that a simulation model can replicate include:

1. The interactions of buses with the general traffic and delay that his causes
2. The interaction between left-turning vehicles and traffic in the oncoming direction
3. The delay that is caused by turning vehicles interacting with pedestrians in crosswalks
4. Oversaturated conditions can be modeled including the queues that spillback into the upstream
intersection and cause delay; also the delay to the side street is modeled due to spillback
5. Right turn on red is modeled realistically by looking for acceptable gaps in the conflicting traffic
6. Parking maneuvers causing delay to vehicles in the lane adjacent to the parking
7. The effect of short-term or long-term events, such as taxis or work zones that block one or more
lanes
8. All controller types (pretimed, semiactuated, and fully actuated), as well as stop and yield signs
9. Traffic patterns that vary over time

5.5.3 Simulation of Pedestrian Environments

Many simulators (e.g., VISSIM and Aimsun) have now added a module for realistically simulating
pedestrian behavior. As with the vehicles, the pedestrians are simulated individually and can model
the interaction between vehicles and pedestrians (at crosswalks) as well as be used for the planning
and design of urban spaces, planning layouts of public transportation terminals, designing pedestrian
crossing facilities, safety analysis, and more.34,35 The Urban Analytics Framework (UAF),35 which is
a pedestrian simulation model that uses Quadstone Paramics traffic microsimulator combined with
a free space agent model, allows the simulated people to move freely within the constraints of
their defined space. Unlike a traditional traffic model the free space model has no links/lane/node
etc. that dictate the agents movement.36 Figure 5.3 is a graphics output from the UAF model. The
model can also show Level of Service (LOS) using colored bands to show where the hot spots for
pedestrian LOS are, where the definition of LOS can be defined by the user. See Figure 5.4, which
is in black and white so that the colored bands cannot be seen, but the LOS definitions can be seen
in the figure.

UAF presentation graphics

FIGURE 5.3 Graphic output of UAF pedestrian simulation model. [Source: http://
www.paramics-online.com/downloads/info_sheets/UAF_brochure.ped]
5.10 NETWORKS AND SYSTEMS

Level of service density and agent direction markers

FIGURE 5.4 Pedestrian levels of service shown on facility. [Source: http://www.
paramics-online.com/downloads/info_sheets/UAF_brochure.ped]

5.5.4 Calibrating the Mechanisms and/or the Model

Calibration is done to adjust the model parameters used in the various mathematical relationships so
that they better match to local conditions.
Consider the left-turn mechanism under permissive signalization, which is basically a gap accep-
tance rule that considers the size of the available gap, the speed of the approaching vehicle, and per-
haps the type of opposing vehicle. It might also consider the type of left-turning vehicle, the pressure
from queued vehicles behind the turner, the number of lanes to be crossed, and other factors.
The challenge is to define the mechanism in a way that is both realistic and capable of calibration
with an affordable amount of data. The model outputs are compared against your real-world data.
At this level of detail, it may be that the model as an entity is not calibrated as such, but that it is
run for reality checks on whether the overall performance is credible.

5.5.5 Validating the Mechanisms and/or the Model

Validation is a distinct operation from calibration, and requires data reserved or collected for the purpose.
Calibration data cannot be used to validate a model, simply because it is then a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Validation can be done on two levels: the microscopic checking of individual mechanisms and
the macroscopic checking of aggregate performance measures. The latter category may verify that
arterial travel times, average speeds, and delay conform to real world observations when observed
traffic data (volumes, composition, etc.) are fed into the model. Because this is a statistical test, usu-
ally operation with a null hypothesis that the model and real-world results are the same, a validation
may require a significant amount of data.
With current technology, calibration and/or validation can more accurately be done using
GPS-GIS integrated systems to collect and process actual vehicle movement information. Research
done at Louisiana State University has shown that car following data, for instance, can be collected
and processed using GPS with significant benefits when comparing the cost to the accuracy.37

5.6 ISSUES IN TRAFFIC SIMULATION

A number of issues in planning a traffic simulation deserve special attention.

 SOFTWARE SYSTEMS AND SIMULATION FOR TRANSPORTATION APPLICATIONS 5.11

5.6.1 Number of Replications

Assuming that the traffic simulation model is as random as the real world, at least in its internal
mechanisms, the resulting performance measures will be samples or observations from a set of pos-
sible outcomes. That is, each performance measure is a random variable, with a mean and variance
(among other properties).
Because of this, several runs (or replications) of the situations are needed, each with its own set
of seed random numbers. If one desires a certain confidence bound, a considerable number of repli-
cations might be required. If one can only afford a limited number of replications, then the resultant
confidence bound might be disappointing.
Some practitioners cite a rule of thumb that three replications are the minimum. Many have
translated that to mean that three replications will suffice. This is without foundation, and confidence
bounds must be considered in each case.
Consider the nine replications in the table, in which the average speed is read from simulation results.

Run Average speed (mph)

1 45.2
2 52.5
3 43.7
4 48.4
5 47.3
6 53.2
7 46.7
8 42.9
9 50.1

From the results in the table, one can estimate a mean of 47.8 mph and a standard deviation of
3.6 mph. Further, the 95 percent confidence bounds on the mean are +2.4 mph. If +1.0 mph were
desired, then 51 replications would have been required, rather than 9.
If one could only afford 9 replications (or had time for only 9), then the 95 percent confidence
bound on the mean is unavoidably +2.4 mph.
Some situations are not as bleak as this particular example. There is also some advantage to
be gained when two control policies are to be compared, in terms of their effect on a performance
measure (in this case, the mean speed).
Consider the case in which nine replications are done with each of two control policies, using
the same nine sets of seed numbers for each policy (that is, the identical traffic, so to speak). This
pairs specific sets of runs and allows us to construct the following table.

Control Control
policy one, policy two, Paired
average average difference
Run speed (mph) speed (mph) (mph), CP2-CP1
1 45.2 48.1 2.9
2 52.5 54.3 1.8
3 43.7 44.3 0.6
4 48.4 51.4 3.0
5 47.3 50.2 2.9
6 53.2 55.8 2.6
7 46.7 48.3 1.6
8 42.9 45.2 2.3
9 50.1 53.5 3.4
5.12 NETWORKS AND SYSTEMS

If a test were done on this data without pairing, under the hypothesis of the two means are the
same, the variability in the data would lead us to not reject the hypothesis of equal means. Even if
such a difference existed, it could not be detected.
However, by pairing the runs according to the seed numbers (i.e., the exact traffic patterns), the
differences in each pair can be computed, as shown in the last column in the table.
In this particular case (which we arranged to be so dramatic), all of the differences are positive,
with a mean of 2.3 mph and a standard deviation of 0.9 mph. Indeed, the 95 percent confidence
bounds on the mean are +0.6 mph, and a hypothesis of zero difference is easily rejected. While not
all cases are so dramatic, the reader should understand the advantages of a well-planned set of runs.

5.6.2 Length of Run

Early on in the practice of simulation, another rule of thumb emerged: Runs should be (at least)
15 minutes long. Again, many users interpreted this to be that they can all be 15 minutes long.
Rather than follow such a rule of thumb, the user should focus on the defining events, determine
how often they occur, and select the run duration so that a reasonable number of these cases occur
during the observation period.
Consider the case in which the productivity of an approach is being considered, and there are two
defining eventsthe vehicle at the head of the queue is a left-turner who traps everyone else, or it
isnt. If the first situation occurs only 10 percent of the time, and by definition can occur only once
every cycle length, then a 15-minute period with a 90-second cycle length will have no such block-
ages 35 percent of the runs, and only one such blockage another 39 percent of the runs. Lengthening
the run duration will dramatically lower these probabilities, if that is desired.
It is good practice to use runs of 1 to 2 hours of simulated time when a number of such rare
events should be included in the typical period. Another situation which may lead to longer runs is
taking the effect of buses into account, because the interarrival times on even a very busy route is
often at most 3 to 5 minutes.

5.6.3 Specific Detailed Mechanisms

Consider the case of bus traffic in an urban area. If the simulation model specifies a dwell time distri-
bution but does not link it to the interarrival time between buses, an important mechanism contributing
to platooning of buses can be overlooked. This is because the delayed buses in the model do not have
more people waiting for them, and early-arriving buses do not have fewer. If a user is looking at overall
performance, this may not be a problem. But if the user is trying to study bus platooning specifically,
this can be a major problem, and the mechanism might have to be created and the model revised.

5.6.4 Avoiding Use of the Model Beyond Its Limits

This is simply another aspect of the point just made, but is a particular challenge when a user is
trying a new application. A working knowledge of the model is needed, on a level that only the
developers and a few others might have.

5.6.5 Selecting Performance Measures for the Model

The traffic engineering profession has a number of well-established measures (volume, flow rate,
speed, delay) and a number of evolving ones, particularly as related to multimodal considerations.
Even so, the measures defined in some simulation models may not conform to the standard definitions
and usage. For instance, there are many forms of speed used in both practice and in traffic models;
the delay reported in a simulation model is not necessarily the same delay reported in the HCM.
 SOFTWARE SYSTEMS AND SIMULATION FOR TRANSPORTATION APPLICATIONS 5.13

5.6.6 User-Friendly Input and Output

Whereas the preceding items focus on some of the important issues in applying models, the most impor-
tant user issues tend to be in how user-friendly the input/output is, and how efficiently it can link to
existing data bases, if at all. For instance, TEAPAC, Synchro/SimTraffic, and to some extent CORSIM
make major points on how clear the input process is, and/or how much they link to other models.

5.7 VISUALIZATION

There are two aspects of visualization that deserve attention: (1) the displays that tell system managers
and the public the condition of the network, and (2) graphic representations of simulator outputs that
provide powerful visual images of the situation.

5.7.1 Visualization of Simulation Results

Computer models are measured by their ability to effectively communicate the results, in two-
dimensional orpreferablythree-dimensional representations.
Figure 5.5 shows the output of the VISSIM model in which the two-dimensional simulation
output is shown in the context of aerial photographs of the area; this is a standard feature available
in all microsimulation software. Figure 5.6 shows another VISSIM output, with a three-dimensional
perspective. The PARAMICS and AIMSUN models also have three-dimensional displays.
Other models provide three-dimensional animations as part of the standard output, or as specialty
displays for specific needs. Figure 5.7 shows an AIMSUN output, and Figures 5.8 and 5.9 show a
WATSIM output tailored to an acute operational problem in a very constrained urban environment.

FIGURE 5.5 VISSIM animation of output, with aerial photographs for context. [Source: VISSIM web site.25]
5.14 NETWORKS AND SYSTEMS

FIGURE 5.6 VISSIM three-dimensional animation of output, including an LRT line. [Source: VISSIM web
site.25]

FIGURE 5.7 AIMSUN three-dimensional display of animated output. [Source: TSS web site.27]
 SOFTWARE SYSTEMS AND SIMULATION FOR TRANSPORTATION APPLICATIONS 5.15

FIGURE 5.8 WATSIM three-dimensional display, tailored to specific constrained urban setting. [Source: KLD
Associates materials,24 used with permission.]

FIGURE 5.9 Three-dimensional display of acute traffic problem, prepared to consider signal and design changes.
[Source: KLD Associates materials,24 used with permission.]
5.16 NETWORKS AND SYSTEMS

5.8 WHY SIMULATE? ADVANCED TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEMS,

AND OTHER

The most basic reasons for using simulation extensively are straightforward:

1. Users can experiment with various control policies without disrupting real traffic and making that
traffic part of an experiment.
2. The same can be said of alternative designs for remedies to existing or future conditions, such as
lane additions, rerouting of traffic, changes in direction of links, and so forth.
3. Above all, these alternative control implementations and designs can be considered rapidly,
without major capital investment.
4. Whenever desired, various alternatives can be considered with exactly the same traffic load and
conditions, something that is simply not feasible in the real world.

The potential place of traffic simulators in real-time control is another important reason.
Historically, simulators and signal optimization programs dependent upon simulators could really
only be used off-line. However, now if one aspires to truly real-time control, the time period available
for the computations is rather short.

5.9 TRAFFIC SIMULATORS

At the beginning of this chapter, a number of simulators and computational tools that imbed or use
simulations were enumerated. At the risk of overlooking a key model, it will simply be noted that
the available and widely used tools (nationally and internationally) include CORSIM, WATSIM,
VISSIM, PARAMICS, AIMSUN, and TEAPAC Complete. There are other tools that incorporate
some simulation, such as HCM/Cinema (for intersection animation), SYNCHRO/SimTraffic for
signal optimization and simulation; and others that handle signal optimization and/or capacity,
including SIGNAL2000 and HCS.
Because there are a number of models in the commercial market, each with its own satisfied
user base, this chapter will not attempt to rank or rate the alternative models. Indeed, the literature
contains little information on extensive comparative testing of various models, relative to each other
or to base cases with real field data.
Several of the models emphasize their suitability for intelligent transportation systems (ITS)
applications. One example application is the modeling of toll plazas with a mix of exact change,
cash, and electronic toll collection (ETC).
As the use of these technologies spread even more widely, the potential for a new rangeand
qualityof network data has become available. This shaped what simulators can do, and how they
are designed, to address problems that heretofore were deemed infeasible.

5.10 REAL-TIME TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

Simulation is now being used to support real-time decision making for traffic management
centers. Simulation tools have become so fast and integrated that large systems can use macro- to
meso- to micromodeling in a very short period of time. Aimsun 6, for example, intergrates static
and dynamic models and includes a static traffic assignment model, a mesoscopic simulator, and a
microsimulator.38 In the Greater Toronto Area, for example, Aimsuns macro-, meso-, and micro-
simulation framework is being used on the 400-series highway network and the major arterials,
which covers its busiest freeways, HOV and collector-express lanes, and a fully electronic tolled
highway.39
 SOFTWARE SYSTEMS AND SIMULATION FOR TRANSPORTATION APPLICATIONS 5.17

5.11 PLANNING TOOLS

This chapter has focused on computational models and simulation models that are becoming more
powerful over time, and more capable of addressing sophisticated problems. This is proper, logi-
cal, and accurate. The profession has to some extent moved to a set of tools that simply cannot be
executed by hand. For a document such as the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)1 to recognize and
accept this principle for operational analyses is truly ground-breaking. The 2010 HCM, for the first
time, does not have worksheets for the signalized intersection nor urban streets chapter, and the
methods can no longer be done by hand. They are still deterministic models, but they are iterative
and more complex than ever before.
At the same time, there is a growing demand for planning techniques that are fast, simple, and
easy to use and communicate. It is generally acknowledged that these must be consistent with
operational techniques but capable of giving preliminary guidance on the capability of facilities in
terms of AADT and quality of flow. The Florida DOT has been a pioneer in this development of
modern simplified tools with software such as the multimodal ARTPLAN40 for arterial planning
and FREEPLAN41 for freeway planning, to handle both the early stages of planning (generalized
planning) for in the ball park estimates of LOS, and for preliminary engineering, which covers
conceptual planning, preliminary design, and project development, as well as some aggregate assess-
ment of operational impacts.
This is given special note because these models contribute to the development of a spectrum of
tools available to the professional, suited to the precision and data availability needed at different
stages; in this continuum, it is the simulation models that often represent the most sophisticated of
the approaches.

5.12 RESOURCES FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

To a large extent, the references for this chapter have been listed as a set of Web sites, covering
most of the well-used models and some software distribution centers. These Web sites contain much
information on the availability and performance of software systems used for transportation.

REFERENCES

1. Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume 1: Traffic Analysis Tools Primer, June 2004, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/traf-
ficanalysistools/tat_vol1/index.html
2. Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume II: Decision Support Methodology for Selecting Traffic Analysis Tools,
June 2004, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/trafficanalysistools/tat_vol2/index.html
3. Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume III: Guidelines for Applying Traffic Micro-simulation Modeling Software,
June 2004, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/trafficanalysistools/tat_vol3/index.html
4. Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume IV: Guidelines for Applying CORSIM Micro-simulation Modeling
Software, January 2007, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/trafficanalysistools/tat_vol4/index.html
5. Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume V: Traffic Analysis Toolbox Case StudiesBenefits and Applications,
November 2004, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/trafficanalysistools/tat_vol5/index.html
6. Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume VI: Definition, Interpretation, and Calculation of Traffic Analysis Tools
Measures of Effectiveness, January 2007, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop08054/index.htm
7. Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume VII: Predicting Performance with Traffic Analysis Tools, March 2008,
http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop08055/index.htm
8. Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume VIII: Work Zone Modeling and SimulationA Guide for Decision-
Makers, August 2008, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/wz/trafficanalysis/tatv8_wz/index.htm
9. Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume IX: Work Zone Modeling and SimulationA Guide for Analysts,
March 2009, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/wz/trafficanalysis/tatv9_wz/index.htm
5.18 NETWORKS AND SYSTEMS

10. CORSIM: Microscopic Traffic Simulation Model, Version 5.1, http://mctrans.ce.ufl.edu/featured/tsis/Version5/

corsim.htm
11. Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2004, http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/
Highway_Capacity_Manual_2000_152169.aspx
12. Highway Capacity Software (HCS+) at McTrans Web site, http://mctrans.ce.ufl.edu/hcs/
13. SIGNAL2000 at Strong Concepts Web site, http://www.strongconcepts.com/
14. TRANSYT-7F at McTrans Web site, http://mctrans.ce.ufl.edu/featured/TRANSYT-7F/index.htm/
15. PASSER II-02 at McTrans Web site, http://mctrans.ce.ufl.edu/store/description.asp?itemID=29
16. General Features of TRANSYT-7F, http://mctrans.ce.ufl.edu/featured/TRANSYT-7F/Release11/MacroSim.htm
17. SIG/Cinema at KLD Associates Web site, www.kldassociates.com
18. Synchro/SimTraffic at Trafficware Web site, http://www.trafficware.com/
19. TEAPAC Complete at Strong Concepts Web site, http://www.strongconcepts.com/
20. The Urban Traffic Control System in Washington DC, USDOT, FHWA, Washington DC, Sept 1974; see
also Logical design and demonstration of UTCS-1 network simulation model by Lieberman, Worrall, and
Bruggeman in Transportation Research Record 409, (1972).
21. Andrews, B. et al. (1989). The NETSIM Graphics System. Transportation Research Record 1112,
Transportation Research Board.
22. FRESIM User Guide, Version 4.5, Turner Fairbank Highway Research Center, USDOT, FHWA, Washington
DC, April 1994.
23. TSIS Users Guide, Version 4.0 beta, CORSIM Users Guide Version 1.0 beta, Kaman Sciences Corporation,
January 1996.
24. WATSIM at www.kldassociates.com
25. VISSIM Web site, www.atacenter.org/tst/Vissim.html
26. PARAMICS Web site, http://www.paramics-online.com/index2.htm
27. AIMSUN Web site, www.aimsun.com/site/content/category/1/32/57/
28. TransCAD, Caliper Corporation, www.caliper.com/tcovu.htm
29. Priority, Market-Ready Technologies and Innovations List, Federal Highway Administration, http://www.
fhwa.dot.gov/crt/lifecycle/dynasmart.cfm
30. DYNASMART-P, https://mctrans.ce.ufl.edu/store/description.asp?itemID=780
31. What are Dynamic Traffic Management Systems? http://eng.odu.edu/transportation/itsdecision/newitsd/
ITS_Serv_Tech/traff_manag/dyn_trafficmangmt_summary.html
32. DynaMIT, http://mit.edu/its/dynamit.html
33. TSIS-CORSIM Documentation, www.mctrans.ce.ufl.edu/featured/tsis
34. Pedestrian Simulation with VISSIM, www.vissim.de/software/transportation-planning-traffic-engineering/
software-system-solutions/vissim/pedestrian-simulation/
35. Pedestrian Simulation The Urban Analytics Framework, http://www.pedestrian-simulation.com/
36. UAF, Many Problems One Solution, http://www.pedestrian-simulation.com/reason_integrated_approach.php
37. Sivaram, C. and M. Kulkarni, M., GPS-GIS integrated systems for transportation engineering. http://www.
gisdevelopment.net/technology/gps/techgp0008pf.htm
38. Aimsun 6, The Integrated Transport Modeling Software, http://www.aimsun.com/site/content/category/1/32/53/
39. MTO Chooses Aimsun as the Modeling Software for Ambitious Proof-of-Concept. http://www.docstoc.
com/docs/25117464/
40. ARTPLAN, Florida Department of Transportation, part of LOSPLAN software package, http://www.dot.
state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/los_sw2m2.shtm
41. FREEPLAN, Florida Department of Transportation, part of LOSPLAN software package, http://www.dot.
state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/los_sw2m2.shtm