Marine Transportation System Travel Time Atlas

Similar documents
Data Sources and Performance Measures for the Marine Transportation System

Eric Thomas Benchmark River and Rail Terminals

ERDC and e-nav Data Use

Miami River Freight Improvement Plan Financial Management Number:

Inland Waterway Navigation

Metrics and Indicators of Coastal Infrastructure Resilience for Marine Transportation

Quantifying the Impacts of Shoaling in Navigation Channels via Historical Waterborne Commerce Data

RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT UPDATE

Waterborne Commerce and Performance Data

AAPA Facilities Engineering Seminar & Expo

MULTIMODAL NETWORK ANALYSIS FOR COAL FREIGHT IN KENTUCKY SESSION 6.2.3

U.S. Port and Inland Waterway Modernization Strategy: Options for the Future

Infrastructure Framework

AGING AND FAILING INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS: NAVIGATION LOCKS

Can Traditional Highway Asset Management Strategies Be Adapted To Waterway Infrastructure Analysis?

Monitoring Completed USACE Navigation Projects

Appalachia s Coastal Port Partners, Gateways to Global Commerce

Waterways 1 Water Transportation History

Draft Application for New License for Major Water Power Project Existing Dam

The Great Lakes. Progress Report

Industry Perspective on Well Decommissioning Pennsylvania Orphaned and Abandoned Well Workshop May 16, 2018

FREIGHT POLICY TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE. A Real Time Assessment of a Major Transportation Disruption Sara Simmons, Eric Jessup and Ken Casavant

2017 Freight System Plan

U.S. Department of Transportation Maritime Administration

CHANNEL SILTATION AND NATIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BENEFITS OF MAINTAINING AUTHORIZED DEPTHS IN TEXAS

Creating Baseline Analytics and Automated Reporting for Improved Decision Making in the Maritime Transportation System

STATUS OF MAJOR PROJECT INVESTMENTS BRIEFING TO INLAND WATERWAYS USERS BOARD

Traffic Department Anchorage: Performance. Value. Results.

The national public policy organization advocating a modern and well-maintained system of ports and inland waterways

National Capital Region Congestion Report

Environmental and Industry Listening Sessions

Presentation to the Illinois Chamber of Commerce Infrastructure Committee on the Illinois Maritime Transportation System

An Investigation into the 2012 drought on Apalachicola River. Steve Leitman, Bill Pine and Greg Kiker

ONTARIO-MICHIGAN BORDER TRANSPORTATION PARTNERSHIP Planning/Need and Feasibility Study. 1. Work Accomplished This Period (4 Weeks)

Dredging Issues US Ports Perspective. Jim Walker, AAPA December 3, 2015

e-navigation & River Information Services Inland Waterways Users Board Meeting Pittsburgh, PA 06 June 2012

CESWL-OP-O DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SWLR XX Little Rock, District Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 867 Little Rock, Arkansas

Louisiana s Marine Transportation System Plan and Sponsored Projects

US Navigation Program Overview

Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund

AAPA PORT SECURITY SEMINAR & EXHIBITION July 16 18, 2008 HOUSTON, TX REGIONAL SECURITY INITIATIVES Mitch Smith Operations Director Port of South

International Propeller Club

FACT SHEET. 1/ The Recovery Act stipulates that Recovery Act funds for IWTF projects will not be cost shared.

Welcome STEP 1: STEP 2: STEP 3:

UNDERSTANDING THE GLOBAL IMPACT OF INCREASED WATERWAY COMMERCE. Bruce Lambert Executive Director, Institute for Trade and Transportation Studies

Review of Inland Navigation Needs: Shipper and Carrier Perspectives

Traffic Division Public Works Department Anchorage: Performance. Value. Results.

RUNOFF VOLUMES FOR ANNUAL OPERATING PLAN STUDIES

The Immediate Aftermath of the Panama Canal Expansion on the Southeastern United States

National Capital Region Congestion Report

Navigation Research and. Development

Ironton Russell Bridge Project

10/19/18. Source: Texas Transportation Institute, 2007

Wapato Access Feasibility Study

USACE Integration of Metrics

Exploring the Possibilities At Prado Dam

Richard Teubner, Vice President INTRODUCTION TO SEACOR AMH

Ironton Russell Bridge Project

e-navigation and it s applicability to inland waterways

2017 Freight System Plan

Columbia Basin Operations and Flood Risk Management

Channel Prioritization Tool. CPT Overview to AAPA

16 September Water Management Wilmington District. US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG

Driving Our Ports Toward Greater Efficiency Gene Seroka, Executive Director Port of Los Angeles

TAMING BIG DATA FOR SMARTER FUTURE

Waterborne Commerce Statistics Center

The Impacts of Unscheduled Lock Outages

John H. Kerr Dam and Reservoir Virginia and North Carolina (Section 216)

Electric Forward Market Report

Ports and Waterways: Lifeline for U.S. Agriculture

ORSANCO Interstate Collaboration to Protect the Ohio River. The Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission

Street Maintenance Section Maintenance and Operations Division Public Works Department Anchorage: Performance. Value. Results.

Gulf Intracoastal Waterway Value to the Nation

Operations Report. Stephanie Monzon Manager, Markets Coordination MC Webinar January 22, PJM 2018

Does Water Resources Management in the Snake River Basin Matter for the Lower Columbia River? Or Is the Snake River Part of Another Watershed?

Safety of Navigation and. Traffic Management

Ironton Russell Bridge Project

Chapter 5 - Needs Assessment and Freight Forecast

DATE: MARCH 01, 2018 HERITAGE VALLEY POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE (HVPAC)

Operations Report. Stephanie Monzon Manager, Markets Coordination Operating Committee July 10, PJM 2018

Arkansas Water Resources Center

A MODAL COMPARISON OF DOMESTIC FREIGHT TRANSPORTATION EFFECTS ON THE GENERAL PUBLIC EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. November 2007

RETREAT AGENDA CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE

Ironton Russell Bridge Project

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ROCK ISLAND DISTRICT RIVER INFRASTRUCTURE

Woking. q business confidence report

U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Charleston District Overview

INLAND NAVIGATION ECONOMICS WEBINAR SERIES #8 Elasticity of Demand - Shipper Responsiveness

Arkansas Water Resources Center

A Real Time Assessment of the Columbia-Snake River Extended Lock Outage: Process and Impacts

Operations Report. Hong Chen Senior Lead Engineer, Markets Coordination Members Committee October 22, PJM 2018

List of Appendices APPENDIX A: WY 2000 LAKE MICHIGAN DIVERSION ACCOUNTING REPORT APPENDIX B: WY 2001 LAKE MICHIGAN DIVERSION ACCOUNTING REPORT

Water Planning and Stewardship Committee Item 6a February 8, 2016

Center for Energy Studies. David E. Dismukes Center for Energy Studies

National Capital Region Congestion Report

Modernizing the Ohio River Navigation System

Michigan s Welcome Centers Promoting Tourism

WELCOME. Central Coast Terminal Development Plans. Top 5 Things to Know about the Plan

TEXAS PORTS STRATEGIC MISSION PLAN & PORT CAPITAL PROGRAM. November 16, 2016 November Transportation Commission Workshop November 16, 2016

WTP Phase 2 Implementation & Freight System Plan

Transcription:

Marine Transportation System Travel Time Atlas Patricia DiJoseph, PhD Coastal & Hydraulics Lab U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center Harbors & Navigation Committee Meeting AAPA March 30-31, 2016

Project Motivation The Navigation Mission of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) facilitates the safe, reliable, and economically efficient movement of vessels on the nation s waterways. Travel times are applied as performance measures for other transport modes: By measuring travel-time performance, and related system metrics based on travel time, agencies will be better able to plan and operate their systems to achieve the best result for a given level of investment. At the same time, travelers, shippers, and other users of those systems will have better information for planning their use of the system. National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 618 Cost-Effective Performance Measures for Travel Time Delay, Variation, and Reliability, 2008

Project Objective Create a statistical profile of waterway system travel times from vessel position reports including travel time variability, speed, and delay; evaluate during normal conditions as well as in response to recurring and non-recurring events such as storms, high and low water levels, vessel incidents, and operation and maintenance (O&M) actions. Applications Establish system performance baselines Quantify system performance during and after disturbances Measure system resiliency (withstand, recover) Locate system bottlenecks and areas with most critical needs Compare performance pre and post-o&m Aid decision making for O&M actions Resiliency Cycle Identify vessel traffic patterns over time including port pairs, trip chaining, and systems

Data Source: Automatic Identification System (AIS) AIS is a shipboard broadcast system Operates in the VHF radio spectrum Information includes the following: Vessel identification Location (latitude and longitude) Time stamp Heading Speed Vessel characteristics Broadcasts are at discrete time intervals Every 2 to10 seconds while a vessel is underway Every 3 minutes while at anchor

Data Source (Continued) AIS carry requirements are set by federal regulations: Self-propelled vessel of 65 feet or more in length, engaged in commercial service Towing vessel of 26 ft or more in length and more than 600 horsepower, engaged in commercial service Self-propelled vessel that is certified to carry more than 150 passengers Self-propelled vessel engaged in dredging operations Self-propelled vessel engaged in the movement of dangerous cargo or flammable or combustible liquid cargo Fishing industry vessels Obtaining data Landside receivers can collect the broadcasts Variety of commercial sources are available for data

Methodology to Estimate Travel Times Illustration Vessel docked at a port in Bayonne, NJ 12/29/14 Vessel AIS position reports from 12/27/14 through 1/4/15 6

Methodology Illustration (Continued) Bayonne, NJ Savannah, GA Estimated travel time = 2 days, 1 hour, and 25 minutes TX_DTTM LAT LAT LON AOI 12/28/2014 19:30 19:30 40.6701-74.0783Bayonne Bayonne 12/31/2014 3:50 3:50 40.6679-74.0750Bayonne 1/2/2015 5:15 5:15 32.1295-81.1391Savannah 1/2/2015 5:20 5:20 32.1295-81.1391Savannah Savannah 1/4/2015 15:45 15:45 32.1294-81.1389Savannah 7 Consecutive entries with different AOI flags indicate an inferred transit between respective locations

Inland Waterway Travel Time Estimation Methodology The methodology is flexible and scalable across space and time: 1. Define the origin and destination (O-D) and the time period O-D example is a port 2. Segment the navigational waterway between the O-D into links Increases the sample size Isolates factors that affect travel time and variability Link endpoint examples: A location queuing begins, Waterway confluence 3. Calculate link travel times 4. Identify and remove outliers 5. Calculate O-D statistics from summing link travel times 8

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Travel time (hr) Methodology Step 4 Outlier Removal Processing of data includes identifying, investigating, and removing outliers (13% for this example) Causes of outliers: Position reports not received Vessels not traveling directly from the beginning to the end of the link Outlier definition: Lock links = >72hrs Non-lock link = transit time of a vessel that travels entire link at <.5kts Future research on refining Occurrence of outliers may decreases with new carriage regulations and as AIS coverage increases 2013 Travel Time Estimate for a 10 Mile Link Centered at L&D 52 No Outliers Removed 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 downstream Month (2013) 9

Origin/From (river mile) Inland Waterway Example Results: 2013 Ohio River Trip Table Travel Time (hrs): 25 th percentile Median 75 th percentile Downstream end of River (981) Mount Vernon, IN (827) Louisville, KY (602) Cincinnati, OH (480) Huntington- Tristate, WV (317) Upstream end of River/ Downstream end of River (981) Mount Vernon, IN (827) Destination/To (river mile) Louisville, KY (602) Cincinnati, OH (480) Huntington -Tristate, WV (317) Upstream end of River/ Pittsburgh, PA (0) 28.0 73.8 97.0 127.5 200.2 34.2 89.4 117.4 154.9 243.9 46.4 116.7 152.0 202.7 320.1 20.1 45.8 69.0 99.5 172.2 24.0 55.3 83.2 120.7 209.8 35.3 70.3 105.6 156.3 273.7 50.2 30.1 23.2 53.7 126.4 59.5 35.5 28.0 65.5 154.5 82.2 46.9 35.3 86.0 203.4 66.3 46.2 16.1 30.5 103.2 78.4 54.4 18.9 37.5 126.5 109.1 73.8 26.9 50.8 168.1 88.6 68.5 38.4 22.3 72.7 106.0 82.0 46.5 27.6 89.0 149.1 113.8 66.9 40.1 117.4 142.8 122.7 92.6 76.5 54.2 174.9 150.9 115.4 Innovative 96.5 solutions 68.9 for a safer, better world

Sample Results Origin Destination Distance (river mi) 25 th Percentile Travel Time (days)* Pittsburgh, PA Cairo, IL 981 6.8 Cairo, IL Baton Rouge, LA 717 2.7 *Estimates from 3 months of 2013 data 11

Total daily delay (hrs) Sample Results Total Daily Delay by Event for L&D 52 in 2013 Delay: The amount of travel time over what s expected Expected travel time = 25 th percentile travel time during lockage conditions Total Delay considers traffic volume and delay per vessel 25 lockage 20 15 10 5 0 8/1 8/21 9/10 9/30 10/20 11/9 11/29 Date (mm/dd/13) scheduled closure-repair or maintenance unscheduled closurerepair or maintenance unscheduled closureaccident or collision unscheduled closureweather 12

lock/dam 27 lock/dam 25 lock/dam 22 lock/dam 20 lock/dam 18 lock/dam 16 lock/dam 14 lock/dam 12 lock/dam 10 Delay (vessel days) lock/dam 8 lock/dam6 lock/dam 5 lock/dam 3 lock/dam 1 Upper Delay (vessel days) Sample Results: Cumulative Delay at Locks Cumulative delay on links containing locks can be compared to spot seasonal variations, identify system bottlenecks, and direct O&M resources Links are 10 miles long with the exceptions of locks spaced less than 10 miles apart Cumulative Annual Delay by Date and Lock Link, Downstream Direction of Travel, Ohio River, 2013 Cumulative Annual Delay for Lock Links, Downstream Direction of Travel, Upper Mississippi River, 2013 and 2014 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 2013 Total 2014 Total Lock link 13

Sample Results: Link Speed 14

Coastal Ports Application Derived coastal information: Travel times within navigation channels Travel times and number of vessels between ports (port connectivity, system analysis) Cascading effects from isolated project events Identification of critical network components Network decision making 15

Travel time (hr) Coastal Port Example: Houston Ship Channel (HSC) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 25th Percentile 75th Percentile Median Month (2013) Monthly travel time statistics for HSC outbound traffic from the Bayport flare to the Gulf entrance 16

Main Takeaways for the Travel Time Atlas 1. Data source is accessible. 2. Outputs include travel times, speed and cumulative delay. 3. Analysis is scalable across space and time. 4. Enables, real-time and historic, snapshot of the state of the system and the ability to pinpoint time and location of changes in the state. 5. Provides quantifiable performance measures for system decision makers. 6. Improves voyage planning capabilities for system stakeholders. 17

Thank you Patricia K. DiJoseph 601-634-2020 Patricia.K.DiJoseph@usace.army.mil 18