7

Trip distribution
Trip distribution is another of the major aspects of the transportation simulation
process and although generation, distribution and assignment are often discussed
separately, it is important to realise that if human behaviour is to be effectively
simulated then these three processes must be conceived as an interrelated whole.
In trip distribution, two known sets of trip ends are connected together, without
specifying the actual route and sometimes without reference to travel mode, to form
a trip matrix between known origins and destinations.
There are two basic methods by which this may be achieved:
1. Growth factor methods, which may be subdivided into the
(a) constant factor method;
(b) average factor method;
(c) Fratar method;
(d) Furness method.
2. Synthetic methods using gravity type models or opportunity models.

Trip distribution using growth factors

Growth factor methods assume that in the future the tripmaking pattern will remain
substantially the same as today but that the volume of trips will increase according
to the growth of the generating and attracting zones. These methods are simpler
than synthetic methods and for small towns where considerable changes in land-use
and external factors are not·expected, they have often been considered adequate.
(a) The Constant Factor Method assumes that all zones will increase in a uniform
manner and that the existing traffic pattern will be the same for the future when
growth is taken into account. This was the earliest method to be used, the basic
assumption being that the growth which is expected to take place in the survey area
will have an equal effect on all the trips in the area. The relationship between present
and future trips can be expressed by
tjj =tij X E
where t{j is the futwe number of trips between zone i and zone j. tij is the present
number of trips between zone i and zone j. E is the constant factor derived by

38

R. J. Salter, Highway Traffic Analysis and Design

© R. J. Salter 1989
 TRIP DISTRIBUTION 39
dividing the future number of trip ends expected in the survey area by the existing
number of trip ends.
This method suffers from the disadvantages that it will tend to overestimate the
trips between densely developed zones, which probably have little development
potential, and underestimate the future trips between underdeveloped zones, which
are likely to be extremely developed in the future. It will also fail to make provision
for zones which are at present undeveloped and which may generate a considerable
number of trips in the future.

(b) The Average Factor Method attempts to take into account the varying rates of
growth of tripmaking which can be expected in the differing zones of a survey area.
The average growth factor used is that which refers to the origin end and the
destination end of the trip and is obtained for each zone as in the constant factor
method. Expressed mathematically, this can be stated to be
, (E· +E·)
fij = fjj I 2 J

p. A-
where Ei = ___! and Ei =~
Pi Oj

tii=future flow ab,

tii = present flow ab,
Pi =future production of zone i,
Pi = present production of zone i,
A i = future attraction of zone j
ai = present attraction of zone j
At the completion of the process attractions and productions will not agree with
the future estimates and the procedure must be iterated using as new values for Ei
and Ei the factors Pifpj and A i/aj where pj and aj are the total productions and
attractions of zones i and j respectively, obtained from the first distribution of trips.
The process is iterated using successive values of pj and aj until the growth factor
approaches unity and the successive values of tji and tii are within 1 to 5 per cent
depending upon the accuracy required in the trip distribution.
The average factor method suffers from many of the disadvantages of the constant
factor method, and in addition if a large number of iterations are required then the
accuracy of the resulting trip matrix may be questioned.

(c) The Frator Method 1 This method was introduced by T. J. Fratar to overcome
some of the disadvantages of the constant factor and average factor methods. The
Fratar method makes the assumptions that the existing trips tii will increase in pro-
portion to Ei and also in proportion to Ei. The multiplication of the existing flow
by two growth factors will result in the future trips originating in zone i being greater
than the future forecasts and so a normalising expression is introduced which is the
sum of all the existing trips out of zone i divided by the sum of all the existing trips