A technology selection and design model of a semi-rapid transit line
Tóm tắt
We present a new optimization model for technology selection and design of a semi-rapid transit line. With respect to previous studies, we improve the synthetic representation of the temporal and spatial variability of demand, and of several operational and design aspects. We apply the model to two scenarios offering comparable performance by commercially available technologies in terms of service, rather than assuming that service quality is strongly associated with technology. The model is validated by comparing some computed performance indices with best practices. We show that planning for a faster technology can be more important than the choice between bus and rail per se, except at very low demand density, and that differences of total cost, sum of passengers’ time value and operator’s cost, between the technologies are smaller than commonly held across a wide range of higher demands. At high demand density multiple-unit rail offers the most cost-effective way to achieve high capacities under many conditions. A scenario variation analysis shows the relevance of differences between value of time components, the bias of averaging vehicle load ratios when assessing the crowding disutility, the usefulness of a demand index abstracting from some specific parameter choices, and the high impact of the project discount rate.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Akçelik R, Rouphail NM (1993) Estimation of delays at traffic signals for variable demand conditions. Transp Res Part B Methodol 27(2):109–131
Bartholdi JJ, Eisenstein DD (2012) A self-coördinating bus route to resist bus bunching. Transp Res Part B Methodol 46(4):481–491
Bruun EC, Allen DW, Givoni M (2018) Choosing the right public transport solution based on performance of components. Transport (Forthcoming)
Casello JM, Lewis GM, Yeung K, Santiago-Rodríguez D (2014) A transit technology selection model. J Public Transp 17(4):50–75
Daganzo CF (2009) A headway-based approach to eliminate bus bunching: systematic analysis and comparisons. Transp Res Part B Methodol 43(10):913–921
Daganzo CF (2012) On the design of public infrastructure systems with elastic demand. Transp Res Part B Methodol 46(9):1288–1293
Fernandez R, Planzer R (2002) On the capacity of bus transit systems. Transp Rev 22(3):267–293
Gutiérrez-Jarpa G, Laporte G, Marianov V, Moccia L (2017) Multi-objective rapid transit network design with modal competition: the case of Concepción, Chile. Comput Oper Res 78:27–43
Haywood L, Koning M, Monchambert G (2017) Crowding in public transport: who cares and why? Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 100:215–227
Hörcher D, Graham DJ, Anderson RJ (2017) Crowding cost estimation with large scale smart card and vehicle location data. Transp Res Part B Methodol 95:105–125
Khreis H, Warsow KM, Verlinghieri E, Guzman A, Pellecuer L, Ferreira A, Jones I, Heinen E, Rojas-Rueda D, Mueller N, Schepers P, Lucas K, Nieuwenhuijsen M (2016) The health impacts of traffic-related exposures in urban areas: understanding real effects, underlying driving forces and co-producing future directions. J Transp Health 3(3):249–267
Kikuchi S, Vuchic VR (1982) Transit vehicle stopping regimes and spacings. Transp Sci 16(3):311–331
Klumpenhouwer W, Wirasinghe SC (2016) Cost-of-crowding model for light rail train and platform length. Public Transp 8(1):85–101
Li Z, Hensher DA (2013) Crowding in public transport: a review of objective and subjective measures. J Public Transp 16(2):107–134
Litman T (2017) Valuing transit service quality improvements. Technical report, Victoria Transport Policy Institute
MBTA (2017). http://www.mbtabackontrack.com. Accessed 1 June 2017
Moccia L, Allen DW, Bruun EC (2016) New results of a technology choice model for a transit corridor. In: European Transport Conference 2016. Association for European Transport (AET)
Moccia L, Giallombardo G, Laporte G (2017) Models for technology choice in a transit corridor with elastic demand. Transp Res Part B Methodol 104:733–756
Moccia L, Laporte G (2016) Improved models for technology choice in a transit corridor with fixed demand. Transp Res Part B Methodol 83:245–270
Newman P, Davies-Slate S, Jones E (2018) The entrepreneur rail model: funding urban rail through majority private investment in urban regeneration. Res Transp Econ 67:19–28
Van Oort N (2016) Incorporating enhanced service reliability of public transport in cost-benefit analyses. Public Transp 8(1):143–160
Perugia A, Cordeau J-F, Laporte G, Moccia L (2011) Designing a home-to-work bus service in a metropolitan area. Transp Res Part B Methodol 45(10):1710–1726
TCQSM (2013) Transit capacity and quality of service manual. Transportation Research Board, Washington
Tirachini A, Hensher DA (2011) Bus congestion, optimal infrastructure investment and the choice of a fare collection system in dedicated bus corridors. Transp Res Part B Methodol 45(5):828–844
Tirachini A, Hensher DA, Jara-Díaz SR (2010) Restating modal investment priority with an improved model for public transport analysis. Transp Res Part E Logist Transp Rev 46(6):1148–1168
Tirachini A, Sun L, Erath A, Chakirov A (2016) Valuation of sitting and standing in metro trains using revealed preferences. Transp Policy 47:94–104
US-DOT (2011) The value of travel time savings: departmental guidance for conducting economic evaluations. Technical report, Department of Transportation, US
Verbich D, Diab E, El-Geneidy A (2016) Have they bunched yet? An exploratory study of the impacts of bus bunching on dwell and running times. Public Transp 8(2):225–242
Vuchic VR (1969) Rapid transit interstation spacings for maximum number of passengers. Transp Sci 3(3):214–232
Vuchic VR (1984) The auto versus transit controversy: toward a rational synthesis for urban transportation policy. Transp Res Part A 18(2):125–133
Vuchic VR (2005) Urban transit: operations, planning, and economics. Wiley, Hoboken
Vuchic VR (2007) Urban transit systems and technology, chapter 4 transit system performance: capacity, productivity, efficiency, and utilization. Wiley, Oxford, pp 149–201
Vuchic VR, Newell GF (1968) Rapid transit interstation spacings for minimum travel time. Transp Sci 2(4):303–339
Vuchic VR, Stanger RM, Bruun EC (2012) Bus rapid transit (BRT) versus light rail transit (LRT): service quality, economic, environmental and planning aspects. Transp Technol Sustain. Springer, Berlin, pp 256–291
Wardman M, Whelan G (2010) Twenty years of rail crowding valuation studies: evidence and lessons from British experience. Transp Rev 31(3):379–398