Scribd Logo
Carica

Benvenuto in Scribd!

  • A Comparison Test Between Headway and Schedule Based PT Methodology Using Empire Corridor Intercity Travel Demand Model

    Caricato da

    citilabs
    103 visualizzazioni14 pagine
    Empire Corridor High Speed Rail service program connecting Penn Station in New York city with Niagara Falls, New York (niagara county) model based on Public Transport (PT) timetabling. 'Pivot' or Incremental Four Step model structure Calculate change in generalized costs, rather than absolute generalized cost Perform Mode Split and Destination choices using incremental nested multinomial logit (MNL) based on composite costs changes.

    Descrizione originale:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Formati disponibili

    PDF o leggi online da Scribd

    Hai trovato utile questo documento?

    Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

    Segnala questo documento
    Empire Corridor High Speed Rail service program connecting Penn Station in New York city with Niagara Falls, New York (niagara county) model based on Public Transport (PT) timetabling. 'Pivot' or Incremental Four Step model structure Calculate change in generalized costs, rather than absolute generalized cost Perform Mode Split and Destination choices using incremental nested multinomial logit (MNL) based on composite costs changes.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Scarica in formato PDF o leggi online su Scribd
    Segnala contenuti inappropriati
    103 visualizzazioni14 pagine

    A Comparison Test Between Headway and Schedule Based PT Methodology Using Empire Corridor Intercity Travel Demand Model

    Caricato da

    citilabs
    Empire Corridor High Speed Rail service program connecting Penn Station in New York city with Niagara Falls, New York (niagara county) model based on Public Transport (PT) timetabling. 'Pivot' or Incremental Four Step model structure Calculate change in generalized costs, rather than absolute generalized cost Perform Mode Split and Destination choices using incremental nested multinomial logit (MNL) based on composite costs changes.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Scarica in formato PDF o leggi online su Scribd
    Segnala contenuti inappropriati
    di 14

    EmpireCorridorIntercityHighSpeedRail Model PTTimetablingTest

    Ajit Makhija,ColbyBrown
    November2011

    NewYorkEmpireCorridorHighSpeedRail
    TIERIEnvironmentalImpactStatement(EIS)studyjointly preparedbytheFederalRailroadAdministration(FRA)and NewYorkStateDepartmentofTransportation(NYSDOT) ToevaluateEmpireCorridorHighSpeedRailserviceprogram connectingPennStationinNewYorkCitywithNiagaraFalls, NewYork(NiagaraCounty).

    EmpireCorridorOverview

    463milecorridor NewYorkCitytoNiagaraFalls

    ModelingMethodology
    PivotorIncrementalFourStepmodelstructure Calculatechangeingeneralizedcosts,ratherthan absolutegeneralizedcost PerformModeSplitandDestinationchoices using incrementalnested multinomiallogit (MNL)basedon compositecostschanges Assignmentoftrips

    ModelFramework
    SkimExtraction
    Calculatechangeinzonetozonegeneralizedcosts,ratherthanabsolutegeneralized cost

    ModeSplitandDestinationChoice:IncrementalNestedMNL
    Weightravelcostcomponents andcomparetobaseyear& fares Modeand/orDestination Shiftbasedoncomposite utilityofatrippurpose Factortriporiginsand destinationsbasedongrowth Applyreviseddestinationand modepercentages

    AssignmentofPersonTrips
    Highway Rail Bus Air

    Generalizedcost(GC)forModel
    Zonetozonegeneralizedcosts extractedusingCube VoyagerHIGHWAY&PUBLICTRANSPORTprogram Forhighway,GCisameasureoftraveltime,distance, toll cost Forpublictransport,GCisameasureofinvehicle time, outvehicle time,fare cost Monetaryvariablesconvertedtominutesusingvalueof time(VOT)forbusinessand othertrips

    CubeVoyagerPlatform

    DefinedCorridorwithPT&AccessEgressLines

    PublicTransport(PT)ModuleBackground
    Headwaybased Assumestravelerarriveata stoprandomlyandtakethe firstserviceavailable Suitableformodelingurban areawithhighfrequency services Inappropriateforinfrequent servicesorwhenservicesare coordinated(switchfrom conventionalrailtohighspeed rail) Schedulebased (timetabling) ModelsthePTservicewith actualscheduling(timetabling) Specifictodaytypeandtime period Timetablinggivesabetter representationoftravelchoice andjourneytime/costs

    HighSpeedRailModelAlternatives
    79mph 90mph 110mph 125mph(bothPTModules) 160mph(bothPTModules) 220mph

    ModelApplicationResults:Headwaybased
    RailRidershipandTravelTimeReductionTrends
    220mph

    160mph

    RailRidership

    125mph 110mph 90mph 79mph

    nobuild

    0%

    10%

    20%

    30%

    40%

    50%

    60%

    70%

    PercentageReductioninTravelTime

    %DifferenceinRidershipbtw.Headwayand SchedulebasedPTmodule
    2.00%

    Rail
    1.50%

    Rail %DifferenceinRidership
    1.00%

    Rail Bus

    0.50%

    Air Air Car

    0.00%

    Car

    Car

    0.50%

    Bus Air

    Bus

    1.00%

    125mph

    Alternatives

    160mph

    Conclusion
    Preliminaryridershipforecastingtestwascarriedout betweenheadway andschedule basedPTmoduleusing empirecorridorintercitymodel Resultsshowthatforhourly highspeedrailservice, schedule basedmoduleproducesreducedrail ridership forboththespeedalternatives,byapproximately1%, whencomparedtoheadwaybasedmodule Athigherfrequencies,thecurrentincrementalmodel structureproducesmoreorlesssimilarridershipresults forboththePTmodules

    Thank you for your attention!

    Potrebbero piacerti anche