TOP SLOPE STABILITY
TOP SLOPE STABILITY CE 410
Popular in Course
Popular in Civil Engineering
This 47 page Class Notes was uploaded by Louie Hansen on Tuesday September 1, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to CE 410 at Portland State University taught by Staff in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 34 views. For similar materials see /class/168214/ce-410-portland-state-university in Civil Engineering at Portland State University.
Reviews for TOP SLOPE STABILITY
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 09/01/15
Oregon Freigh r Modeling River chmg CE 410 March 9 2005 Outline Introduction I Background Oregon vs Freight I Typology of Freight Models I Freight Analysis Framework Conclusion Background Oregon vs Freight I Freight plays on important role in Oregon economy I Freight modes in Oregon I Rail I Truck I Waterway I Air I Pipeline Background Oregon vs Freight I Top Freight Companies Freightliner United Parcel Services Consolidated Freighfways I NW Natural Union Pacific Rail Road Background Oregon vs Freight Market of Changes of Total Trade Canada Up 173 Japan Up 59 Korea Down 19 China Up 689 Taiwan Up 115 Malaysia Up 27 Philippines Down 25 Mexico Up 62 Germany Down 24 Australia Up 283 Background Oregon vs Freight I For each 100 jobs in freightrelated tranSportation sectors about 85 to 150 additional jobs are generated through multiplier effects Port of Portland indicates that about 20 percent of all jobs in the Portland region are influenced by the port39s marine and aviation activities Background Freight Modeling I Wh Do We Care about Freight Mo eling I Growth in freight tranSportation actuvnty I Patterns of merchandise trade 6 economic growth potential Volumes of traffic Background Freight Modeling I Markets served by different modes of transportation and i ntermodal combinations I Safety aspect Energy usage and environmental impact I Effects on national economic system and Impact on policies of different areas FHWA Typology of Freight Models quotamp Typology of Freight Models Network9 Commodity Based Commodity Generation 1 Commodity Distribution 1 Commodity Mode Split 1 Vehicletrip Estimation 1 Traffic Assignment Typology of Freight Models Network Trip Based Tr39i p Generafion Trip Dis r r39ibu rion Traffic Assignment Freight Model for Oregon I 1994 Oregon Department of Tramportation launched Statewide Modeling Improvement Program I Goal To predict wideranging effects of tranSportation land use and economic changes Freight Model for Oregon Oregon STaTewi de Models Firsf Generation Second GeneraTion Developed Inferim economic land use and rr39anspor39TaTion models for sTaTew ide applica rion Research and develop pr39oTo39T39ype sTa rewide and sub s ra re model applications Oregon Freight Model I Mostly adopting Freight Analysis Framework by FHWA I Bose year 1997 Forecast 2030 FAF I FAF converts commodity flows between places into commodity flows and vehicle activity over major segments and nodes of the transportation network I Most rail and water routes I Larger harbors Major transfer points Most major highways FAF Trip Assignment Countytocounty commodity flows to 243380 miles of highways 54 of the National Highway Planning Network I Tonnage gt truck payloads FAF Variables I Estimates of individual cauntytocounty flows from nationally collected data are subject to significant error I The relationships between the geographical patterns of commodity laws and vehicle movements Missing many important elements of routing decisions such as weather FAF Limitations Timeliness I Insensitivity to local policy changes I No estimation based on time or day Excluding shipper and carrier costs I Not userfriendly Oregon Freight Model Figure 1 DDOT Commodity Flow Regions United States and Canada I ha Canada ber 1 nah mnm Narawax Te New Enrch Ba 39xi ew V1 YrJocr Ten Nana Scan Nevfourg a 3 xi ITDDHH act r arc Lencor MiscLn Mama FAI39reEDGB II39BOD I39SIF k i h a 1 Source 19969 ODDT freight truck sm39uagquot Oregon Freight Model Figure 2 ODDT Commodity Flow Regions 0 Source 1995 97 DUCT freight truck surrey 7 J1 9U k i ggugi l 258 372 477 33 55 81 22 49 Medal numbers may net add to totals due to rounding The quototherquot category includes international shipments that moved via pipeline or by an Lmspeclfled mode FAF Results for Oregon Waterborne I Commodity Flow Forecast update and Lower Columbia River Cargo Forecast I Low and high cargo forecasts I Container I Breakbulk I Grain I Mineral bulk I Auto cargo Waterborne international 2000 Actual 2010 Capital Plan 2020 High Volume Forecast Containers 290000 Allows For 677000 TEUs Flexible Growth Breakbulk 585000 Existing Capacity 880000 Allows for Growth Automobiles 385000 Accommodates 503000 units One New Customer Bulk Grains MT 2919000 Meets Growth 10000000 Potential Bulk Minerals 3827000 Facility 5720000 MT Modernization and Storage Capacity Upgrades Rail Freigth Base Year Forecast Recommended Forecasts Estimate Value Rail Passenger 666 1670 36 thousand annual beardingsdemi1 ngs 2004 2030 2004 2030 Rail Freight 591 1023 millions of annual tons 1998 2030 Oregon Rail Plan 2001 Air39 Freight Annual Base Year Forecast Growth Recommended Forecasts Estimate Value Rate Air Passenger 67 millions of annual enplanements 2002 J gt Air Freight 358 39 thousands of annual tons 2004 2 O3 0 2004 2030 Questions d Acknowledgement I Ma sere 39 I Dr Bertini 39 I Nivedi l h Freight Capacity 3 Case Studies 39 J Hiu Sui Ng March 122006 CE 410 Freight Transportation And Logistics Outline Introduction Background Alameda Corridor FAST Corridor CREATE Conclusion Introduction We 1 mummlsmalcmamrwcs mm UnlulSlnua m Fl sd t u vnl unn Hm NUS 2 Noqu Momma WE VE H 27 37B Mrdwawhxsew VD M SIW YET Mun abovbmm uiird 37H Enpkwd ld39nsmdx 257 AgnLAuveJma39w mum m mglasmrw M Populatlon 1 51m x wamlmm 1 Hi MMth WM ride 4 Yquot o ncome m mum u 51 P mnm Em bums sinca V L Foreign Tradef u Ldiu dmzmlty VI SE Kl139MB W A 439 Ewam a lswmsmwmm w are mw HA WWW WHEY EE W M M 0Diomlmxw SZNJVNWHM SJDHKE lHZSVE EARN MAUI rangyvnawsmccmhmsy car new 2mm maqu iu permm m m 7 us mmw mhmnlmlm nmaan 1 mulurhm mum mamMM ur mm mm 5qu M Human mm D nmmms mm mm al lw n quotllmum um mm mm y Mlimmlhnlpmlu nyllrhlbl mm Minn1mm mum TruCk ADT At 1998 Truck ADT At 2020 Background Flullu 15 WINS quot5101117 1m imam Guewlys bv Vltulz 21 quot S htltlum How these gateways deal with theo ver congestion problem39 Werwill look39at 3 case study 1 Los Angles 2 Tacoma and Seattle 3 Chicago N o k 7 3 A 3 n a If I m 2 Q39JN w Legs rm l o m J MM ENSF Ran Line up RaH Lines I Rauyams Los Angeles Rail Lines 1 o mam ra i xpm wc gmmy J W ma wm g 5 i L 3 MP7 V Los Angeles E Em mm 1 EMS M Los Angle Alameda Corridor o 10 miles long rail trench 39 Other 10 miles consisted foverpasse39s and grade separated routes Los Angle Alameda Corridor Bene ts Eliminating conflicts atrmorerthan 200 at grade crossings Double rail speed Saving 15000 hrs delay per day Funding Public Private my mm mm Washington FAST Corridor Freight Action Strategy CorridOr K fagr 39 Dedicated rail corridor 39 Phase I 96 04 15 railroad grade separation Phase II 02 08 8 railroad grade separation 1 ITSProject 1 Truck access project Washington FAST Corridor Overpass Underpass V Improve port accessibility l Construction site in July 2003 showing a closer view of the bridge being constructed over the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad and the East Valley Highway Washington FAST Corridor Benefits 1 Eliminatingconflicts at more than 40 at grade crossings Increase freight speed Increase I5 capacity Funding Public Private AA 39 L n a New brrdg deck eveh a y un AUantrEStrEEt siruhurE rh e reameasrbuuhawes39meuhd AM Man hr r The r BElteaksytbuund r mps vvm bereahghee remuvrngabgrade euhhemuhs dy ng phase DHE wesrb euhu Wm be reahghee rErnuvrng atrgrade e eh heehe hs du ng phase 2 Chicago CREATE Chicago Region EnVironmentaI And Transportation Efficiency Maximize usage of rail corridors Increase efficiency rail network in Chicago Chicago CREATE Railoverllail Grade Separations 6m to rail fly over 39 25 at grade crossing Chicago CREATE Bene ts 1 Reduce rail and motorist Eliminating conflicts at more than 30 grade crossings Moreetticiencycommutr quot rail service i g r congestion l r Funding Public Private 3 Case Study Summary More rail less truck More rail expressways Overpass and underpass to separate rail to vehicles and rail to rail Consolidate railroad operation Private source in public project Questions c ricing and Mode Choice ih Frjht 1 Transpor tip i3 quot Civil amp Environmental Engineering Freight Transportation Outline SupplyDemand CostofService Pricing Value ofService Pricing Rate Making in Practice Mode Choice Pomma Sm mam winter zuus Lemme so 2 2 1 t o a u z E E 9 2 L oi a a E o U E z a E z e 39S m 2 E U
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'