1 umr lock 20 through 25 simulation model inland waterway lock/vessel optimization study upper...

26
1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation Studies University Of Missouri, St. Louis 15 June 2005

Upload: isabella-sharp

Post on 27-Mar-2015

216 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

11

UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model

Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization StudyUpper Mississippi River Locks 20-25

Center For Transportation StudiesUniversity Of Missouri, St. Louis

15 June 2005

Page 2: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

2

The Need for a Simulation Model

Why is a simulation model needed to evaluate alternative traffic management policies on the UMR?- The seasonality of traffic demands,

vessel operations, and lock operations

- The interdependence of individual vessel lockage times

- The scope of the management measures under evaluation and their systemic impacts

Page 3: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

3

The Bi-modal Distribution of Lockage Times at UMR Locks 20-25 for 2000-2003

Page 4: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

4

The Distribution of the Wait For Lock Service at UMR Locks 20-25 for2000-2003

Page 5: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

5

The Seasonality Of System UseTotal Lockages by Month atUMR Locks 20-25 for 2000-2003

Page 6: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

6

Seasonality Of System Use (Continued)The Number of Tows Using the System

Page 7: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

7

Seasonality of the Wait For Lockage Time Distributions2000-2003

Page 8: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

8

Seasonality of Vessel Lockage Time Distributions 2000-2003

Page 9: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

9

Seasonality of Non-Stop Pool Travel Time Distributions 2000-2003

Page 10: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

10

Seasonality of Total Queue Sizes Locks 20 Through 25 2000-2003

Combined Averages & Maximum Queue SizesLock 20 through Lock 25

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Jan-0

0

Mar-

00

May-0

0

Jul-00

Sep-0

0

Nov-0

0

Jan-0

1

Mar-

01

May-0

1

Jul-01

Sep-0

1

Nov-0

1

Jan-0

2

Mar-

02

May-0

2

Jul-02

Sep-0

2

Nov-0

2

Jan-0

3

Mar-

03

May-0

3

Jul-03

Sep-0

3

Nov-0

3

Qu

eu

e S

ize &

Maxim

um

# o

f V

essels

Avg Upbound Queue Locks 20 - 25 Avg Dow nbound Queue Locks 20 - 25

Max Upbound Queue Locks 20 - 25 Max Dow nbound Queue Locks 20 - 25

Page 11: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

11

Combined Average Total Queue SizesLock 20 through Lock 25

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

Qu

eue

Siz

e &

Max

imu

m #

of

Ves

sels

Average Queue Locks 20 - 25 12 per. Mov. Avg. (Average Queue Locks 20 - 25)

Trend in Seasonality of Total Queue Sizes Locks 20 Through 25 2000-2003

Page 12: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

12

The Simulation Model

A discrete event simulation model of the segment of the UMR composed on Locks 20 through 25 and connecting pools is constructed using Micro Analysis and Design’s Micro Saint Sharp.

Micro Saint Sharp is a widely used, commercially available software package designed to build discrete event simulation models that facilitates model building and animation.

Any user with a Micro Saint Sharp license may use and alter the simulation model.

Simulation results may be analyzed in Micro Saint, any statistical package, and most spreadsheet applications.

Page 13: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

13

The Simulation Model

Vessels (large tows, small tows, and recreation craft) enter the system at one of ten entry points following seasonally estimated, independent inter-arrival time distributions.

Vessels complete a lockage after system entry and then make a seasonally adjusted decision to: (1) continue to the next sequential lock in their direction of travel; (2) stop; or (3) re-configure their flotilla. If vessels stop or re-configure their flotilla, they are terminated in the appropriate pool after completing their lockage and then later regenerated in the pool in which they terminated.

All recreation craft are terminated after a single lockage.

Page 14: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

14

The Simulation Model

Vessel lockage times depend on the vessel configuration, the direction of travel, the month of occurrence, and the state of the lock when the lockage occurs.

Pool transit times depend on the vessel configuration, the direction of travel, and the month of occurrence.

Periods of lock closure are modeled as independent occurrences with independent durations.

Page 15: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

15

The Simulation Model

Monthly and annual measures of system output and performance such as the categorized tow-miles produced, categorized utilized tow hours, categorized lockage times and utilizations, categorized lock delay times, and categorized pool transit times are recorded.

The performance measures are analyzed using both Micro Saint’s built in analytical tools and SPSS.

Page 16: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

16

Simulation Model Schematic DiagramTow Traffic

Page 17: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

17

Simulation Model Schematic DiagramRecreation Vessel Traffic

Page 18: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

18

Simulation Model DetailLockages

There are 360 classes of lockages (lognormal distributions) at each lock characterized by:- Direction of vessel travel (upbound,

downbound);- Class of vessel (multi-cut tow, single cut tow,

jackknife, knockouts, and recreation traffic);- Lockage type (fly, turnback, exchange); and- Month of occurrence.

Locks are periodically made not available to service vessels (exponential distributions).

Page 19: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

19

Simulation Model DetailVessel Traffic

Seasonally adjusted independent entrances of four different types of tows at ten separate system locations (exponential distributions)

Seasonally adjusted transition probabilities for directing each class of tow movement through the system

Seasonally adjusted independent lock-specific recreation vessel arrivals (exponential distributions)

Seasonally adjusted and directionally specific travel times for four separate tow classes through the lock pools (lognormal distributions)

Page 20: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

20

Comparison of 100 Runs of the Simulation Model with the 2000-2003 Omni Data

Results of 100 UMR Simulations Compared with 2000 - 2003 OMNI Data

Lock

20 Lock

21 Lock

22 Lock

24 Lock

25 Totals Percent Observed Lockages per Year 3,341 3,461 3,295 3,537 3,911 17,545 Mean Simulated Lockages per Year 3,286 3,428 3,306 3,525 3,879 17,424 99.3% Observed Wait Time per Year (hours) 6,250 5,786 9,864 10,150 10,067 42,117 Mean Simulated Wait Time (hours) 5,570 5,347 9,078 10,166 10,540 40,703 96.6% Observed Lock Usage per Year (hours) 4,620 4,868 5,367 5,262 5,273 25,390 Mean Simulated Lock Usage (hours) 4,476 4,755 5,280 5,154 5,174 24,839 97.8%

Page 21: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

21

Comparison of 100 Runs of the Simulation Model with the 2000-2003 Omni Data

Pool 25 Pool 24 Pool 22 Pool 21OMNI Time 5.56 4.34 3.76 2.88Simulation Time 5.41 4.31 3.76 2.96Comparison 102.82% 100.52% 99.86% 97.32%

Mean Transit Times by All Tows

Pool 25 Up Pool 24 Up Pool 22 Up Pool 21 UpSimulation 1,314 1,040 1,126 994OMNI 1,305 1,031 1,113 998Comparison 100.74% 100.94% 101.19% 99.55%

Pool 25 Down Pool 24 Down Pool 22 Down Pool 21 DownSimulation 1,353 1,152 1,138 1,053OMNI 1,350 1,155 1,145 1,055Comparison 100.24% 99.81% 99.36% 99.76%

Mean Number of Annual Complete Pool Transits by Tows

Page 22: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

22

Comparison of 100 Runs of the Simulation Model with the 2000-2003 Omni Data

Lock 25 Up Lock 24 Up Lock 22 UP Lock 21 Up Lock 20 UpSimulation 1701.41 196.01 410.94 377.09 482.68OMNI 1,695.25 193.00 409.00 387.25 482.50Comparison 100.36% 101.56% 100.47% 97.38% 100.04%

Lock 25 Down Lock 24 Down Lock 22 Down Lock 21 Down Lock 20 DownSimulation 209.88 368.35 313.19 456.36 1469.96OMNI 219.75 357.00 306.50 482.50 1,471.75Comparison 95.51% 103.18% 102.18% 94.58% 99.88%

Mean Annual Number of Tows Entering the System

Page 23: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

23

Results of 100 Simulations with Existing Traffic Management

N Minimum(hours)

Maximum(hours)

Mean(hours)

Std. Deviation(hours)

Wait Time - All Vessels All Locks

100 31,143.40 61,116.74 40,702.85 5,307.23

Total Observable Tow Time

100 169,512.60 204,237.82 181,323.96 6,190.18

Tow Time Large Tows

100 108,497.10 137,077.13 118,881.22 5,317.35

Tow Time Small Tows

100 57,684.91 67,160.69 62,442.74 1,674.04

Tow Wait Lock 20 100 3,829.85 8,335.91 5,336.76 784.76

Tow Wait Lock 21 100 3,813.51 6,798.38 5,053.98 615.79

Tow Wait Lock 22 100 5,691.13 17,226.15 8,711.92 1,773.16

Tow Wait Lock 24 100 5,928.28 19,839.57 9,720.14 2,185.98

Tow Wait Lock 25 100 7,040.96 18,466.77 9,992.27 1,791.80

Valid N (listwise) 100

Page 24: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

24

Results of 100 Simulations with an Example of a Locally Optimal Queue Re-sequencing Policy (Fastest First)

NMinimum

(hours)Maximum

(hours)Mean

(hours)Std. Deviation

(hours)

Wait Time - All Vessels All Locks

100 29,259.48 54,476.87 37,212.13 4,385.33

Total Observable Tow Time

100 168,436.65 196,913.45 177,727.75 5,109.69

Tow Time Large Tows

100 112,430.95 141,442.40 122,072.55 5,167.35

Tow Time Small Tows

100 52,090.20 57,861.32 55,655.20 1,066.37

Tow Wait Lock 20 100 3,824.44 7,408.98 5,146.42 653.88

Tow Wait Lock 21 100 3,795.01 6,115.51 4,795.23 488.64

Tow Wait Lock 22 100 5,823.86 12,302.29 8,068.92 1,297.46

Tow Wait Lock 24 100 5,930.94 18,577.34 9,184.83 1,966.61

Tow Wait Lock 25 100 6,142.02 12,082.58 8,135.89 1,164.66

Valid N (listwise) 100

Page 25: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

25

Changes Resulting from a Locally Optimal Queue Re-sequencing Policy (Fastest First)

NMinimum

(hours)Maximum

(hours)Mean

(hours)Std. Deviation

(hours)

Wait Time - All Vessels All Locks

100 -1,883.92 -6,639.87 -3,490.72 -921.90

Total Observable Tow Time

100 -1,075.95 -7,324.37 -3,596.21 -1,080.49

Tow Time Large Tows

100 3,933.85 4,365.27 3,191.33 -150.00

Tow Time Small Tows

100 -5,594.71 -9,299.37 -6,787.54 -607.67

Tow Wait Lock 20 100 -5.41 -926.93 -190.34 -130.88

Tow Wait Lock 21 100 -18.50 -682.87 -258.75 -127.15

Tow Wait Lock 22 100 132.73 -4,923.86 -643.00 -475.70

Tow Wait Lock 24 100 2.66 -1,262.23 -535.31 -219.37

Tow Wait Lock 25 100 -898.94 -6,384.19 -1,856.38 -627.14

Valid N (listwise) 100

Page 26: 1 UMR Lock 20 through 25 Simulation Model Inland Waterway Lock/Vessel Optimization Study Upper Mississippi River Locks 20-25 Center For Transportation

26

Vessel Re-sequencing Discussion

Mean annual reduction of approximately 3,600 total tow hours required to complete the same set of vessel itineraries.

This reduction represents approximately a 2% decrease in equipment time needed to complete the same set of movements through these five locks.

Some vessels “win” and other vessels “lose”.

System performance variability is also reduced.