Show simple item record

dc.creatorJackson, Dena Delise
dc.date.accessioned2012-06-07T22:59:43Z
dc.date.available2012-06-07T22:59:43Z
dc.date.created2000
dc.date.issued2000
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1969.1/ETD-TAMU-2000-THESIS-J31
dc.descriptionDue to the character of the original source materials and the nature of batch digitization, quality control issues may be present in this document. Please report any quality issues you encounter to digital@library.tamu.edu, referencing the URI of the item.en
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (leaves 109-113).en
dc.descriptionIssued also on microfiche from Lange Micrographics.en
dc.description.abstractThis investigation involved a comparative analysis to assess the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of seven previously proposed methods of measuring travel time reliability. For each method, reliability was calculated using a l2-week sample of traffic flow data for a 23 mile portion of the 1-405 corridor in Seattle, Washington. The methods were then evaluated and ranked at the qualitative level using such criteria as the clarity and simplicity of the measure, its analysis capability, descriptive ability, accuracy of results, and general applicability. It was determined that the Range of Travel Times and the Florida Reliability Method were best suited for measuring reliability in terms of clarity and simplicity. With regards to analysis capability, the Range of Travel Times, the Florida Reliability Method, and the Percent Variation were easy to calculate. The Range of Travel Times, Florida Reliability Method, Percent Variation, and Traffic Characteristic Profiles best reflected changes in traffic flow on the corridor. The Success Measure was the only measure that met accuracy requirements. With regards to general applicability, the Florida Reliability Method was the only method which characterized reliability as an indicator of how well conditions on the corridor met travelers' expectations. These observations formed the basis of the qualitative ranking, in which the Florida Reliability Method received the highest overall rating, followed by the Range of Travel Times, Percent Variation of Average Travel Times, Traffic Characteristic Profiles, and Variability Index. The Reliability Performance Indicator and the Success Measure received the lowest overall ratings. Data collection requirements for reliability measurement were also examined. An analysis of minimum sample size and aggregation intervals suggested that a 6-week and 3- month sample produced similar estimates of corridor travel times; however, it appeared that traffic flow data aggregated to a l5-minute interval did not provide the same results as a 5- minute interval. Based on these observations, it was concluded that a l-week data collection effort was too short, and the optimum data collection period for reliability measurement is a 6-week period using traffic data aggregated to a 5-minute interval.en
dc.format.mediumelectronicen
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherTexas A&M University
dc.rightsThis thesis was part of a retrospective digitization project authorized by the Texas A&M University Libraries in 2008. Copyright remains vested with the author(s). It is the user's responsibility to secure permission from the copyright holder(s) for re-use of the work beyond the provision of Fair Use.en
dc.subjectcivil engineering.en
dc.subjectMajor civil engineering.en
dc.titleReliability as a measure of transportation system performanceen
dc.typeThesisen
thesis.degree.disciplinecivil engineeringen
thesis.degree.nameM.S.en
thesis.degree.levelMastersen
dc.type.genrethesisen
dc.type.materialtexten
dc.format.digitalOriginreformatted digitalen


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

This item and its contents are restricted. If this is your thesis or dissertation, you can make it open-access. This will allow all visitors to view the contents of the thesis.

Request Open Access