8.

2 ROUTE CHOICE BEHAVIOUR:

The most fundamental element of any traffic assignment is to select a criterion which
explains the choice by driver of one route between an origin-destination pair from among the
number of potential paths available.

8.2.1 Wardrop criterion:

Wardrop had proposed two criteria that might be used to predict the paths between an origin
and destination pair. They are:
1. System optimal equilibrium criterion.
2. User optimal equilibrium criterion.

System equilibrium criterion:

“the trip times on all the routes actually used are equal and less than those which would
be experienced by a single vehicle on any unused route”
The first criterion is quite likely in practice. It is assumed that traffic will tend to settle
down into an equilibrium situation in which no driver can reduce his journey time by choosing a
new route.
The relationship labelled “average travel time” shows the variation in the average travel
time faced by individual vehicles as the traffic volume increases.
For example, when the traffic volume is 2000vehicles per hour, each vehicle will
experience an average travel time of 5.0 minutes per mile. When the volume is 3000 vehicles per
hour, then each vehicle will experience an average travel time of 15.0 minutes per vehicle.
The second relationship labelled “marginal travel time,” shows the increase in the
aggregate travel time experienced by all vehicles as traffic volume increases.

At low traffic volumes, the marginal or additional total travel time contributed to all
vehicles by an additional vehicle entering the traffic stream is small. At a volume of 3000
vehicles per hour the average travel time per vehicle is 15 minutes. The marginal travel time
imposed on the set of vehicles by one additional vehicle is 105 minutes. The extra vehicle would
actually experience a travel term increased by 90 minutes.
 Fig
gure 8.3 Va
ariation of Travel
T Timee with Trafffic Volume
 

Wardrop’s
W firrst criterion is equivalen
nt to the nottion of averaage cost priccing of econnomic
theory. Drivers
D mig
ght be regarrded as actiing selfishlyy in that thhey considerr only their own
individuaal travel timees in making
g route choicce decisions,, and not thee manner in which their route
choice in
nfluences thee aggregate travel
t time experienced
e by all motoorists. That iis, they base their
route cho
oice decision
ns on the aveerage travel time
t relationnship.
User equ
uilibrium critterion:
“The
“ averag
ge journey times
t mum which implies thaat the
of all motorists aare a minim
aggregatee vehicle hou
urs spent in travelling iss a minimum
m”.
A user optimal pattern reefers to the in
ndividual pooint of view of each mootorists who tends
to be unaaware of, or at least to be unresponsive to, certaain costs he iimposes on oothers. Hencce the
driver wiill rationally
y not take intto account th
hese costs inn his travel rrelated decissions. Driverrs are
only con
ncerned with
h the privatee costs that they
t must bbear themselves such as petrol costss, the
time cosst of making
g the trip and
a maintaining the veehicle. Conssequently, m
motorists tennd to
underestiimate the soccial cost of trip
t that shou
uld include aall impacts oof their activities on otheers.
A path flow is
i called Waardrop user equilibrium when no drriver has lesss costly alteernate
route.
 Wardrop restated “each path in use operates at minimum cost and each unused path
shows at least minimum cost”.
Wardrop’s second criterion implies that motorists select their routes according to the
marginal cost criterion of economic theory. Drivers are thought to as acting as though they are
aware of the way in which their route choices influence travel times of all drivers using the road
network. If motorists react to the marginal costs they create when they choose a route, then the
total travel time of all vehicles using the system will be minimized.
A number of studies of the route selection behaviour of motorists have shown that
motorists behave according to some criterion intermediate between the two criteria. Blunden and
Taylor both argue that wardrop’s second criterion describes the route choices of motorists better
than Wardrop’s first criterion. However, this evidence is far from conclusive and most of the
traffic assignment techniques used on a routine basis in urban transport studies assumes that
Wardrop’s second criterion governs trip-distribution behaviour. The other trip-distribution
techniques assume that the minimum individual average travel times govern trip-distribution
behaviour.
8.2.2 Diversion Curves
Diversion curve models was developed in early 1950s to know how many drivers would be
diverted from arterial streets to a proposed freeway in order to make decisions related to the
geometric design and capacity of proposed urban freeways.
This model employs empirically derived curves to compute the percentage of trips that would
use the freeway in route between two points on some measure of relative impedance between the
freeway route and the fastest arterial route between the two points.

California diversion curves

These curves used travel-time and travel-distance differences between two alternative paths to
estimate the percentage of trips that would use the freeway.
The formula for determining percentage usage of the freeway in route between two points is
given by
Where
p = percentag
ge usage,
d = distance saved
s in milees,
t = time saveed in minutess,
The diversion curve developed
d by Californiaa diversion cuurve methodd is shown inn figure 8.4.

Fig
gure 8.4 Caliifornia diverrsion curves
8.2.3 Dettroit diversiion curves
The Detrroit Area Traansportation study estim
mated diversioon from a soomewhat diffferent viewppoint,
still using
g a two-paraameter appro
oach. In thiss case, the paarameters foound to be reelated to freeeway
usage weere the ratio of expressw
way speed to
o arterial speeed, and the ratio of exppressway disstance
to arterial distance.. In each case
c the minimum
m appplicable paath was useed for the ratio
computattions.
The diversion curve developed
d by Detroit Arrea Transporrtation Studyy is given in fig 8.5.
 Fiigure 8.5 Deetroit diversiion curves
8.2.4 Burreau of Pub
blic Roads Diversion
D Cu
urve
Undoubtedly, the mo
ost widely used method of diversionn is that whiich is availabble in the Buureau
of Public Road’s series of traafic planning computerr programs. This form
m of diversioon is
dependen
nat on one parameter
p on
nly, the ratio
o of travel ttimes by thee quickest coombined artterial-
freeway route to the quickest arrterial-only route.
r With a one-param
meter relationnship, one ssingle
diversion
n curve defin
nes the relatiionship. Thee form of S-sshaped diverrsion curve iis similar to those
used in th
he Detroit sttudy for high
her speed rattios. Total frreeway usagee occurs wheen the travell time
ratios falll below 48% while no
o freeway ussage can bee anticipatedd when the travel time ratio
exceeds 150% of th
he quickest surface routte.Diversionn curve deveeloped by B
Bureau of P
Public
Road’s iss given in Fiigure 8.6.
 100

EQUAL TIME 
90

Zone‐to‐Zone usage of freeway in 
80
70
PASSENGER CARS 
60
percent 

50 50% USAGE
40
30
20
10
0
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
TRAVEL TIME RATIO 

Figure 8.6 Diversion curve developed by Bureau of Public Road’s

The following formula can be fitted to these curves:

Where p = percent of traffic diverted to new system

tr = travel time ratio = .