EFFECTS OF TRANSIT SIGNAL PRIORITY ON BUS RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM. Sahil Chawla, Shalini Sinha and Khelan Modi

Similar documents
Queue Jump Lane, Transit Signal Priority, and Stop Location: Evaluation of Transit Preferential Treatments using Microsimulation

IMPACT OF TRANSIT SIGNAL PRIORITY (TSP) ON BUS TRAVEL TIMES, LATE BUS RECOVERY, DELAY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)

Operational Comparison of Transit Signal Priority Strategies

Effects of Queue Jumpers and Transit Signal Priority on Bus Rapid Transit

CONDUITS DST-Tel Aviv-Yafo Case Study

In station areas, new pedestrian links can increase network connectivity and provide direct access to stations.

Access BART: TOD and Improved Connections. October 29, 2008

Simulating Street-Running LRT Terminus Station Options in Dense Urban Environments Shaumik Pal, Rajat Parashar and Michael Meyer

Self-Organizing Signals: A Better Framework for Transit Signal Priority

Webinar: Exploring Pedestrian Responsive Traffic Signal Timing Strategies in Urban Areas

5858 N COLLEGE, LLC N College Avenue Traffic Impact Study

A simulation study of using active traffic management strategies on congested freeways

Urban Transport Service Level Benchmarking in Urban Transport for Indian Cities

BURGAS INTEGRATED PUBLIC TRANSPORT PROJECT. Information day, 5 th July 2011, Burgas

Simulation Study of Dedicated Bus Lanes on Jingtong Expressway in Beijing

SAFETY EVALUATION OF AN UNCONTROLLED

Multimodal Approach to Planning & Implementation of Transit Signal Priority within Montgomery County Maryland

Roadways. Roadways III.

WHITE PAPER: TRANSIT SERVICE FOR SOUTH SHAGANAPPI

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR BUS PRIORITY ABSTRACT

Lane changing and merging under congested conditions in traffic simulation models

PLANNING FOR SUSTAINABLE PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE NALIN SINHA INITIATIVE FOR TRANSPORTATION & DEVELOPMENT PROG. (ITD), DELHI

Evaluation of Transit Signal Priority Strategies for Bus Rapid Transit on 5600 West Street in Salt Lake County, Utah

Abstract. 1. Introduction. Long T. Truong 1, Graham Currie 1, Mark Wallace 2, Chris De Gruyter 1

Impact of Cycle Recovery Algorithms on the Performance of Red Truncation Transit Signal Priority

Highway 56 Traffic Study Rymal Road to Cemetery Road

1. Introduction. 2. Survey Method. Volume 6 Issue 5, May Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY

Appendix B: Forecasting and Traffic Operations Analysis Framework Document

BELFAST RAPID TRANSIT. Ciarán de Búrca Director, Transport Projects Division Department for Regional Development

BUS RAPID TRANSIT. A Canadian Perspective. McCormick Rankin International. John Bonsall P.Eng

Bus Lanes and Pre-signals with Transit Signal Priority: Domains of Application

Regional Bus Priority

MCTC 2018 RTP SCS and Madera County RIFP Multi-Modal Project Eval Criteria GV13.xlsx

Decongestion Strategies for Delhi Roads

Bus Lanes Improving Travel Time or Reliability

Transit Signal Priority (TSP) Application to Miami-Dade Transit

VILNIUS SUMP. Gintarė Krušinskaitė International project manager place your logo here

Nomination. Halton Region in Context

2.2 TRANSIT VISION 2040 FROM VISION TO ACTION. Emphasize transit priority solutions STRATEGIC DIRECTION

Evaluation and Improvement of the Roundabouts

Toronto SimCap Toronto, ON, Canada, July 2014 SIDRA INTERSECTION 6. sidrasolutions.com sidrasolutions.com/forums youtube.

Implementing Complete Streets in Ottawa. Project Delivery Process and Tools Complete Streets Forum 2015 October 1, 2015

The FLOW Congestion Assessment Methodology

CAPACITY ESTIMATION OF URBAN ROAD IN BAGHDAD CITY: A CASE STUDY OF PALESTINE ARTERIAL ROAD

Multi-criteria Evaluation of Traffic Signal Control Manfred Boltze and Wei Jiang 1

Traffic flow optimization at sags by controlling the acceleration of some vehicles

The Limassol SUMP Planning for a better future. Apostolos Bizakis Limassol, May 16, th Cyprus Sustainable Mobility and ITS conference

Understanding changing travel demand in Greater Manchester

Urban Transport Policy-making changing perspectives and consequences

Assessing the Traffic and Energy Impacts of Connected and Automated Vehicles (CAVs)

REYKJAVÍK - NEW MOBILITY OPTIONS

Operational Performance Comparison between Three Unconventional Intersection Designs: Left-turn Bypass, Diverging Flow and Displaced Left-turn

IMPACTS OF TRAFFIC RESTRICTIONS AND INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS ON DOWNTOWN PEAK HOUR CONGESTION: A SYNCHRO ANALYSIS FOR BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON

Evaluation of Work Zone Strategies at Signalized Intersections

Tulsa Metropolitan Area LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

EFFICIENCY OF TRIPLE LEFT-TURN LANES AT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

CPC Parking Lot Riverside Drive. Transportation Rationale

Road safety management and speed management

Planning for Ensuring walkability in the city

Multimodal Analysis in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual

Delay analysis due to Road side activities at Urban Arterial Road of Rajkot city

MICROSIMULATION USING FOR CAPACITY ANALYSIS OF ROUNDABOUTS IN REAL CONDITIONS

No-car lanes in Tyneside results from modelling and stakeholder analysis

Title Option One. Why Travel Time Reliability Isn t Just for Drivers. Getting there on Time: Ian Barnes, PE

Low Carbon Mobility Plan For Indian Cities

University of California, Davis Transit Signal Priority Implementation Study

UFLTI Seminar. Capacity and Delay Implications of Connected and Automated Vehicles at Signalized Intersections. Alexander Skabardonis

Evolution of urban transport policies: International comparisons

Demonstration of Possibilities to Introduce Semi-actuated Traffic Control System at Dhanmondi Satmasjid Road by Using CORSIM Simulation Software

Performance Measure Summary - San Jose CA. Performance Measures and Definition of Terms

MEMORANDUM. Charlotte Fleetwood, Transportation Planner

Exhibit 1 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM

Performance Measure Summary - Chicago IL-IN. Performance Measures and Definition of Terms

Gratiot Avenue Transit Study Tech Memo #4: Ridership

A Traffic Operations Method for Assessing Automobile and Bicycle Shared Roadways

Performance Measure Summary - Denver-Aurora CO. Performance Measures and Definition of Terms

BICYCLE SHARING SYSTEM: A PROPOSAL FOR SURAT CITY

Does Combining Transit Signal Priority with Dedicated Bus Lanes or Queue Jump Lanes at Multiple Intersections Create Multiplier Effects?

DON MILLS-EGLINTON Mobility Hub Profile

Durham Region Long Term Transit Strategy

CITY OF HAMILTON PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Transportation Planning and Parking Division

ADDIS ABABA ROAD SAFETY STRATEGY

Development, transport and traffic management in Copenhagen

AIRPORT ROAD ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Corridor Studies. LA 415 and LA 73

Experience from India Future Perspectives

Cycling Inclusive Transport Planning

How To Encourage More Efficient Transportation in Brazilian Cities

TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ASSESSMENT

NEWMARKET CENTRE Mobility Hub Profile

ADVANCED TRANSIT OPERATIONS AND MODELING

Brazil Baseline and Mitigation Scenarios

The City. Population of BH. Population of RMBH. 2.4 million inhabitants. 5.7 million inhabitants. 6.3 million trips a day

Afeasibility study to evaluate bus rapid transit service in the East-West Corridor connecting major employment and activity centers between downtown

Safety impacts of pedestrian crossing configurations and other features of signalized junctions on public transport routes

Appendix E-2: Microsimulation Report

COMPUTER AIDED MODELING OF MIXED TRAFFIC FLOW AT URBAN UNCONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS

A Framework For Integrating Pedestrians into Travel Demand Models

unsignalized signalized isolated coordinated Intersections roundabouts Highway Capacity Manual level of service control delay

CITY OF VAUGHAN EXTRACT FROM COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 30, 2012

Transcription:

EFFECTS OF TRANSIT SIGNAL PRIORITY ON BUS RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM Sahil Chawla, Shalini Sinha and Khelan Modi

PRESENTATION STRUCTURE INTRODUCTION AIM / OBJECTIVES STUDY APPROACH LITERATURE REVIEW MODEL DEVELOPMENT RESULTS EVALUATION CONCLUSIONS

INTRODUCTION LITERATURE REVIEW MODEL DEVELOPMENT RESULTS EVALUATION AND CONCLUSIONS Definition Need for study Aim / objectives Study approach

BUS PRIORITY SYSTEMS Systems that gives priority to Bus movement in traffic Dedicated lane based priority systems Transit Signal Priority System Site/corridor specific priority systems CENTRAL DEDICATED LANE FOR BUS, SEOUL Source: http://www.septua.co.za/quo_vadis_brt.htm TRANSIT SIGNAL PRIORITY Source: kamila W. (2013), www.slideshare.net

NEED FOR RESEARCH multi-faceted problems as a result of rapid urbanization.......... rapid motorization Anticipated vehicle growth High public transit- BUS share Less road space and high vehicle density Alarming road fatality rate Deteriorating environmental quality Fuel consumption Bringing about a more equitable allocation of road space with people, rather than vehicles, as its main focus Introducing Intelligent Transport Systems for traffic management........nutp

AIM The study aims at assessment of effects Transit Signal Priority on Bus Rapid Transit System RESEARCH OBJECTIVES Performance assessment of Bus Rapid Transit System in Indian context Defining indicators for quantitative assessment for performance evaluation Using micro simulation tool for BRTS performance assessment.

RESEARCH APPROACH Review of literature and regulatory regime Primary and secondary data collection Trends of urbanization, traffic and public transport, Policies and programmes for UT sector Indicators (evaluation parameters) Primary surveys for base model development Secondary data (bus services, traffic inputs etc.) Base model development Model development using different inputs as per primary and secondary survey Validation and calibration Scenario generation and evaluation Conclusions and recommendations Development of alternate scenarios (using different priority measures) Result evaluation Comparison (indicators) and efficacy analysis Recommendations (design based)

LITERATURE REVIEW Impacts Rutherford S.(2010)....... dedicated lane systems were always better than typical local busses running in mixed traffic Improved level of service Travel time saving Scale of projects STRATEGIC Evaluation parameters Variability indexing Skabardonis A. (2010)...... describes the formulation of both passive and active signal priority techniques for major roads examined the transit improvement strategies and identifies the major factors affecting transit priority transit network improvements Zlatkovic et al (2013)...... examined the independent and collective effects of queue jump lanes and signal priority system on performance of a Bus Rapid Transit system through Simulation Bus TT improvement Bus speed improvement MESOSCOPIC MICROSCOPI C (Kho et al, 2005) Travel time Delay Headway Variability incidence

LITERATURE REVIEW Dedicated lane based systems Inc. Operating speeds Graftieaux and Hildalgo (2008) Reduction in accidents and fatalities Hidalgo et al., 2012 Pollution reduction Echeverry et al. (2005) User Comfort Cain et al., (2009) Signal priority based systems Portland bus service (10 junctions) Green Ext, Red truncation Reduction in bus TT by 1.4-6.4% Reduction in Transit Delay (due to signal) by 20% Toronto bus, street car (36 junctions) Green Ext, Red truncation Transit signal delay reduced 15-49% TCRP, (2005) LA, bus (211 junctions) Actuated phasing Reduction in bus travel time by 35% Reduction in Transit Delay by 50% TCRP, (2005)

INTRODUCTION LITERATURE REVIEW MODEL DEVELOPMENT RESULTS EVALUATION AND CONCLUSIONS Test corridor and rationale Data collection and methodology Model development Calibration and validation Scenario development and sim-runs

DESCRIPTION OF TEST CORRIDOR AND RATIONALE The stretch from Shivranjani to APMC junction is 3.15 km long and connects major commercial areas, high end residential areas like Shyamal and Anandnagar road, and Ashram road at Sarkhej APMC junction. Catchment area (500 m buffer) is 374 Ha with population of 62907. The employment in catchment area is 15276. The total population in catchment zone is around 78179.

Simulation of with and without priority system DATA COLLECTION Reconnaissance Survey Primary surveys 1. Road inventory 2. Classified volume count* 3. Volume and turns on links* 4. Speed and delay analysis 5. Queue length at junctions 6. Signal phasing Secondary sources 1. Bus routes and frequency 2. Future proposals 3. Traffic demand (EMME model) Model development Model calibration and validation

VISSIM MODEL DEVELOPMENT Base model development Error checking (review inputs) Initial model development Working model before calibration Compare model outputs with field results Acceptable match YES Simulation results NO : readjust parameters Validation & calibration Result(s) output Development of alternate scenarios Scenario development and result comparison Result output and comparison

CALIBRATION AND VALIDATION Speed and delay Driving behavior GPS vs. model results (fig. 2W calibration) GPS survey average (5 days) : TT and Delay (per link) Model calibration to achieve +95 % coincidence for travel time and delay. Standstill distance 0.2 m Headway distance 0.5m, No cooperative lane change, waiting time before diffusion is 0

SCENARIOS DEVELOPMENT BASE SCENARIO (Business as usual) Network properties Base network representing site Curb side bus stations Signal priority N/A Segregated lane No signal priority Segregated lane with passive signal priority Segregated lane with active signal priority Segregated bus lanes Central bus stations Passive signal priority Active signal priority (VAP)

INTRODUCTION LITERATURE REVIEW MODEL DEVELOPMENT RESULTS EVALUATION AND CONCLUSIONS Results comparison for various indicators Conclusions

BUS PERFORMANCE Bus travel time SEGG L +13.1 % SEGG L + SP -6.0 % SEGG L +VAP -16.7 % TT increase resultant of increase in delay Bus Delay Maximum improvement Reduction by 30 % No significant reduction Reduction by 10 % VAP resulted in max. delay reduction Vehicle maneuvering from one lane to other resulted in delay (less amount)

BUS TRAVEL TIME VARIABILITY 40 20 0-20 -40 25 17 Bus Travel Time Variability (Secs) (Vehicle Wise) (Shivranjini to APMC) SEGG LANE+SP vs SEGG LANE + VAP 36 36 25 17 19 3 1 3 3 4 0 2-1 0-5 -1-7 -2-1 -1-11 -24-35 SEGG LANE + SP SEGG LANE + VAP 1-1 5 VEH 1 VEH 2 VEH 3 VEH 4 VEH 5 VEH 6 VEH 7 VEH 8 VEH 9 VEH 10 VEH 11 VEH 12 VEH 13 VEH 14 Business as usual ± 30 % variation SEGG LANE + VAP -10 % to +10 %variation

Nos. of vehicles BUS TRAVEL TIME VARIABILITY INCIDENCE 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Incidence of Travel Time Variation 30 % to 20.1% 20 % to 10.1% 10 % to 5.1% 5 % to 0% 0 % to 5% 5.1 % to 10% 10.1 % to 20% 20.1 % to 30% BAU SEGG LANE SEGG LANE +SP SEGG LANE +VAP SEGG L SEGG L + SP SEGG L +VAP -115 SECS to 124 SECS -35 SECS TO 36 SECS -7 SECS TO 5 SECS 16 % 4.9 % 2.9 %

ARRIVAL TIME VARIABILITY

LARGE VARIATIONS HEADWAY VARIABILITY Business as usual SEGG LANE + VAP BUS HEADWAY VARIABILITY (Seconds) BUS HEADWAY VARIABILITY (Secs) (Shivranjini to APMC) (Scenario-SEGG LANE +VAP) VEH 14 488 533 640 634 669 669 669 670 VEH 14 480.9 482.5 485.6 494 496.4 504.8 504.8 VEH 13 479 428 418 420 404 404 404 405 VEH 13 480 479.4 478 477.6 477.1 473.1 473.1 VEH 12 478 528 544 540 552 549 549 548 VEH 12 479.3 479.9 477.8 481.6 479.9 476.9 476.9 VEH 11 480 427 409 411 395 391 391 393 VEH 11 480.8 481 484.2 483.2 485.8 492.2 492.2 VEH 10 480 529 540 540 536 543 543 542 VEH 10 479.9 479.4 479 477.6 475.3 474.1 474.1 VEH 9 480 414 282 284 267 267 267 266 VEH 9 479.3 477.6 475.6 471.6 470.4 464 464 VEH 8 VEH 7 479 486 530 415 312 639 309 284 638 282 282 280 674 674 variation 674 676 VEH 8 VEH 7 480.7 480.7 482.9 481.4 485.8 481.8 489.4 484.4 493.8 484.7 499.8 487.3 499.8 487.3 VEH 6 476 533 529 533 534 534 534 534 VEH 6 480.6 481.3 480.6 486.4 496.8 499.1 499.1 VEH 5 480 508 647 643 673 672 672 671 VEH 5 478.5 476.4 474.9 463.9 445.8 439.9 439.9 VEH 4 480 444 425 424 418 418 418 418 VEH 4 479.3 478.6 478 477 481.2 477.4 477.4 VEH 3 484 528 542 545 527 530 530 532 VEH 3 480.9 482 483.3 491.6 493 496.8 496.8 VEH 2 476 418 409 406 414 411 411 409 VEH 2 480.5 481.3 480.9 476.8 477.3 478.8 478.8 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 BS1 BS2 BS3 BS4 BS5 BS6 BS7 BS8 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 BS1 BS2 BS3 BS4 BS5 BS6 BS7

CONCLUSIONS No priority Short term No significant improvement compared with BAU Long term Travel time increase compared with BAU resultant of delay increase (junction signaling). Passive signal priority improvement (bus) comparison to business as usual. No improvement for private vehicles Bus TT and delay increases gradually No negative impact on private vehicles (gradual increase) Active signal priority Maximum improvement with comparison to other priority systems. Private vehicle (3W and 4W affected) Bus TT, delay remain unaffected Private vehicle performance deterioration Poor network performance

Thank you