Upload
silvia-parker
View
216
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
TRANSMILENIO
ENRIQUE LILLO
EMME/2 UGM
May 2002
Bogotá
7 million people
Mean annual population growth of4,5 % over the last 10 years
25 % of Colombian GDP
US$ 3 300 GDP per Capita
Transport indicators
1 million automobiles moving 19% of the population
30 000 buses moving 72% of the population
Mean bus speed during peak hour: 7 km/hr
Approximately 650 bus lines
Approximately 22 000 registered buses
On average a transit rider spent 2 hours and 20 minutes in transport per day
Public Transport: The Vehicles
Bus Corriente 26%65 passengersYear: < 90
Bus Intermedio 12%68 passengersYear: > 91
Bus Ejecutivo 9 %72 passengers All Years
Bta Ejecutiva 33%30 passengersYears: 75 - 92
Bta. Ejecutiva 4 %30 passengersYear: 93 >
Colectivos 16 %15 passengersAll years
Source: STT 1998
Public Transport: The Bus Network
Demand for Public Transport: Daily Pattern
0
200000
400000
600000
800000
1000000
1200000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
HORA
Pas
ajer
os
BUS AUTO TAXI
Demand for Public Transport: Socio-economic Strata
Demand for Public Transport : Travel Distance
Demand for Public Transport: Number of Transfers
Demand for Public Transport: Passenger Load
Corredor Pax/hr/direction PHM
Avenida Caracas 36,000
Calle 80 25,100
Autopista Norte 16,700
Norte Quito Sur 25,400
Avenida Suba 24,800
Avenida de las Américas 28,800
Figures correspond to the heaviest load per direction during the a.m. peak hourSource: From passenger counts, April 1999
Transmilenio: Concept
INFRASTRUCTURE Bus Only Lanes
Transfer Stations
Bus Stations
BUS LINES Trunk Routes
Feeder Lines
New Transit Agency
New Public Transport Providers
Fare Collection System
Remote Control System
New Vehicles
Transmilenio: Main Corridors
Transmilenio: Stations
Transfer Stations:
Main : Located at the end of the main corridors
Intermediate: Located along any of the main corridors
Transmilenio : Stations
Regular Stations:
Boarding and Alighting of Passengers
Transfers between trunk lines
Located along the main corridors
Transmilenio: Feeder Zones
Transmilenio: Feeder – Trunk Interaction
Feeder Zobe
Transfer Station
CBD
Feeder Line
Bus Stop
Transmilenio: Feeder – Trunk Interaction
Feeder 1Feeder 2
Trunk Route
COMMONSPACE
FAREINTEGRATION
Bus Operations: Formation of bus queues in stations
= saturation degree = Demand Rate / Service Rate
Queue Length L = 0.7*2/(1-)
Queue Formation
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
degree of saturation
Qu
eu
e L
en
gth
(b
use
s)
Bus Operations: Operational Parameters
x = time in station / available time
x = frequency *(time per bus)/ 3600
example f = 100 veh/h, t = 30 sec
x = 30*100 / 3600 = 0.83
fm= Maximum Frequency
Maximum x = 0,4
0,4=fm * t /3600
fm=1440 / t
C= Operational Capacity
C= passengers / hr
C = fm * Bus Capacity = 1440 * Bus Capacity / t
Bus Operations: Dwelling Time
Tp = to * tp * np
to: bus manoeuvring + door operations time
tp: time per passenger
np:number of passengers = bus capacity * R
R: loading factor
phase oxford street
metro SP
approach sec 5 10open doors sec 2 2
board. and alight. sec 48 25close doors sec 2 5
resume route sec 2 10total sec 59 52fm Veh/h 24 33
bus capacity pas/veh 70 1700
Op. capacity Pas/h 1708 56100
Bus Operations: Operational Capacity C=1440/(to / bus capacity +tp*R) Single stop, one vehicle
Operational Scheme Bus cap.
to tp Operationalcapacity
pas sec sec pas/h veh/h
van 15 10 3 1.137 76
minibus 35 11 3 1.575 45
bus 70 12 3 1.867 27
articulated - fare inside 160 13 1.5 3.777 24
Bi-articulated - fare inside 240 14 1.5 4.019 17
Articulated – at grade boarding 160 13 1 5.120 32
Bi- articulated – at g. b. 240 14 1 5.574 23
Articulated – at g. b. + fare outside 160 13 0.33 9.779 61
Bi-articulated at g.b. + fare outside
240 14 0.3 12.169 51
Bus Operations: Capacity as a function of R (demand)
0
2 000
4 000
6 000
8 000
10 000
12 000
14 000
16 000
18 000
20 000
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
R
pas
/h
Bus Operations: Speed and Frequency
Corredor Caracas
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
frequency veh/hr
sp
ee
d k
m/h
Bus Operations: Fleet size and Frequency
Av. Caracas
0%
100%
200%
300%
400%
500%
600%
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
frequency veh/hr
fle
et
inc
rea
se
Bus Operations: Alternative 1 - Convoys
Capacity of a convoy of articulated buses
0
5
10
15
20
25
1 2 3 4 5 6
Vehicles per Convoy
000
pass
/hr
Bus Operations: Alternative 2 – Differentiated Stops
Segregated bus stops by destination
Local and Express Buses using two lanes per direction in the bus corridors
Platform A Platform B
Bus Operations: Station Design in Avenida Caracas
Strategic Modelling: Objectives
Forecast the demand
Describe the riders
Provide flexibility for simulation
Create appropriate interface with operational design
Provide functional and economic indicators
Create and model that can be updated
Strategic Modelling : Overall Design
Transmilenio Routes Transmilenio
Demand
Transmilenio Service Attributes
Transmilenio Riders
Revenue Calculation
Revenue Sharing
The Demand: Surveys and Counts
Public Transport Passenger and Vehicle Counts (250 000 records)
Boarding and Alighting (20 000 records)
Origin Destination Surveys on board ( 66 000 records)
Public Transport Users Counts in bus stops ( 3 000 records)
Traffic Counts at major intersections
Stated Preferences (1 989 interviews)
Spatial Distribution of the Demand
Origins Destinations
Analysis Zones
0 10 20 30
Kilometers
635 Zones: 606 Inside the study area and 29 outside
EMME/2 Model
635 zones
1904 nodes
8509 links
6 modes
400 public transport lines
Value of Time
Socio-Economic
Stratum
VOT Share of the total demand
1.0 - 1.5 15 $/min 2%
1.5 - 2.5 30 $/min 32%
2.5 – 3.5 45 $/min 65%
3.5 – 6.0 80 $/min 1%
Value of Time Estimated from SP survey
Results (1)
Results (2)
Results(3)
Results (4)
Results(5)
Sensibility Analysis: Fare and Competition
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
650 700 750 800 850
Fare (Col$)
Dem
and
Var
iatio
n
Con reestructuración
Sin reestructuración
Financial Equilibrium: $ 750
10% increase in fare creates a 10% reduction in demand
With strong competition the equilibrium point is 15% higherand the demand drops 25%
Weak Competition
Strong Competition
Sensibility Analysis: Speed and Competition
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
0% 10% 20%
Speed ReductionD
eman
d Var
iatio
n
Con reestrucuración
Sin reestrucuración
5 km/hr less creates a 20% demand reduction
With strong competition the demand drops 70 %
Weak Competition
Strong Competition
Most Common modelling errors (1)
OD Matrices
Obtained from household surveys
Zoning detail is not appropriate for modelling purposes
Lack of information
Automatic adjustments
Market segmentation
Market segmentation criteria
Not enough segments
Wrong Models
Fare system
Different Users
Erroneous simulation of pedestrian access
“ Slow Models”
Most Common modelling errors (2)
Perception of the new system
Commercial Speed
“New system” Effect
Some costs are not truly evaluated ( waiting time, walking time, etc.)
Competition
Fare
Level of Service
Changes in mobility patterns
Peak Hour behaviour
Changes in Land Use