MMTI Literature Review

FORMULATION OF FRAMEWORK
AND GUIDELINES FOR MULTIMODAL

TRANSPORT HUB
Study Area: Sealdah Interchange, Kolkata
Literature Review
Gargi Ghosh
10 AR 60 R08
Under the
guidance of:
Prof. Debapratim
M U LT I M O D A L T RA N S P O RT HUB
“SINGLE-TRAVEL
EXPERIENCE
OR SEAMLESS TRAVEL”
A multimodal journey:
multimodal transport hub facilitates-
INTEGRATION INTERCHANGE
OF MODES BETWEEN MODES
•R a i l f a c i l i t i e s •Passenger waiting area

•Bus facilities •Commercial facilities
• Wa t e r f a c i l i t i e s • T i c k e t i n g o ffi c e s
•Air facilities •Parking facilities
• Ve r t i c a l a n d h o r i z o n t a l
passenger link.
FORMULATION OF FRAMEWORK & GUIDELINES FOR MULTIMODAL TRANSPORT HUB: Study Area: Sealdah Interchange, Kolkata
M U LT I M O D A L HUB : Issues in Kolkata scenario
TOLLYGUNJ BUS DEPOT
TOLLYGUNJ METRO
AUTO STANDS
TOLLYGUNJ TRAM DEPOT
TOLLYGUNJ METRO
FORMULATION OF FRAMEWORK & GUIDELINES FOR MULTIMODAL TRANSPORT HUB: Case Study East – West Metro Corridor,
Kolkata
OBJECTIVES
•To enable the establishment of quality focused multimodal transport

system to provide a “ single journey experience ” i.e. to plan
for “seamless travel”
• To co-coordinate the use of different modes and their proper integration to

decongest road, reduce journey time, enhance environment, provide
greater convenience for commuters & for efficiency and cost effectiveness.
LITERATURE REVIEW
B A S I C T Y P O LO GY O F E X I S T I N G R E S E A RC H :
PRELIMINARY Study on interchange site and catchment area
APPROACH :
EVALUATION
Parameters of interchange Barriers of interchange
LEVEL OF SENSITIVITY
SERVICE ANALYSIS
APPROACH APPROACH Prioritizing and ranking of parameters
LEVEL OF SERVICE APPROACH SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS APPROACH
LOS values Methodology for Estimation of demand

planning process response for variation in
Gap analysis of interchange factors/barriers
opinions
Arrive at stable
priorities for
development
Recommendation of Design standards /

guidelines for transport recommendation
infrastructure and
planning
B A S I C A S P E C T S O F L I T E RAT U R E R E V I E W:
Parameters to
be studied
Surveys to be
undertaken
Data analysis
methodology
Domain of work
L I T E RAT U R E R E V I E W E D :
Group for Urban Interchanges Development and Evaluation
(GUIDE)
URBAN INTERCHANGES - a good practice guide:
Study on Mobility, Intermodality and Interchanges (MIMIC)
Study on interchange and catchment area – 30 European interchanges of four sc

PIRATE:
Study on interchange and catchment area –a sample of 22 European interchang
Multi Modal Transportation System Planning and Design- unpublished

PhD Thesis
A study of intermodal transport Coordination and its contribution to

Sustainable urban transportation In Hong Kong: unpublished
dissertation ,Lui Kwok Wai, William
Study on interchange and catchment area – Hong Kong context
An analysis of Transport Interchanges in west rail – unpublished

dissertation work MAK Steven Chi Fai:
Study on interchange and west rail network – Hong Kong
D E F I N I N G A N I N T E RC H A N G E :
The word interchanges can have with two meanings:
• It can describe the action of interchanging, as undertaken by

passengers as part of a journey (sometimes termed transfer)
• But it can also mean a location where interchange takes place.

Source GUIDE
Public Transit Interchange is a location where passengers transfer from one mode of
transport to another, or between two services of the same mode. An interchange can mean
three things:
the act of changing between mode – interchange
the place where one changes between modes – interchange zone
a purpose-built facility to improve interchange quality – interchange

facility
Source: The Intermodal Transport Interchange for London - Best Practice Guidelines (Tfl et al, January
FORMULATION OF FRAMEWORK & GUIDELINES FOR MULTIMODAL TRANSPORT HUB: Study Area: Sealdah Interchange, 2001
Kolkata
T H E O RY O F I N T E RC H A N G E :
Public transport works by concentrating passengers onto selected corridors, and inevitably
this leaves some journeys without a direct connection. So interchange is a necessary evil
when it comes to providing comprehensive linkages within an urban area.
We regard the utility of having to interchange (Uint) as having three principal

components:
a requirement to interchange (I) which has a penalty associated with it (
Expressed as a linear-additive function, this utility of interchange is:
U = αI + βTT + δw + ε0
U T I L I T Y E Q U AT I O N :
So utility of travel can be

expressed as:
Urest denotes the utility associated with the travel attributes which influence choice other
than those contained in Uint
If Urest is considered to be a function of simply in-vehicle time and cost, then utility of
travel can be expressed as :
UTILITY
E Q U AT I O N :
I (ii) Transfer Time Value

(i) Interchange penalty (iii) Wait Time Value W
TT
α=λ0 + λ1 E(W)+ λ2E(A)+ λ3PJ+
λ4NL + λ5 TC • Security of interchange
•Amount of transfer
Λ0 = Fixed level of penalty time • Ability to engage in
worthwhile
E(W), E(A) = additional waiting time •Nature of transfer activities
PJ = position in journey where •(iii)

Transfer C
environment
Cost Value (iii) In-vehicle time
interchange occurs Value T
• Cost of a single mode
NL= non linear effects journey
• amount of time in
TC= transaction cost of interchange •Cost to interchange vehicle
• cost of travel
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF
PARAMETERS
C O M A PA RAT I V E S T U DY O F PA RA M E T E R S :
ameters of study have been catergorised under the following heads:
HONGKONG UTILITY PARAMETERS FOR
PARAMETERS PIRATE MIMIC STUDY FUNCTION DELHI MMTS STUDY

Location and
overall Rail- street
accessibility Pedestrian linkages movement ease Accessibility local roads Entrance accessibility
LOCAL
PLANNING
AND entrance Existence of Cycle rail-PTI Legibility of interchange
LANDUSE accessibility tracks movement ease movement pattern zone
No conflicting
vehicular and PTI- rail Rail-street movement
pedestrian flows movement ease Ease of access ease
Cycle storage Street- street
facility movement ease Ease of egress Rail-PTI movement ease
Reliable feeder Catchment area passenger flow – Street- street
services < 500m adequate capacity movement ease
High density pick Parking Pedestrian linkage to
up points availability parking location catchment area
Segregation of
Bus &
Cab & taxi services passengers Conflict among modes
Walking distance –
segregation of inside & outside
Parking areas modes interchange
Network
Frequency of Public transport Connectivity operational connectivity
Taxi provision service provision between modes integration between modes
Time synchronised
LOGISTIC AND Operation Time physical operation between
OPERATIONAL Overall quality Waiting time Bus availability synchronization integration modes
Unified ticketing Frequency of network Frequency of
Car parking system Tram availability modes integration service
Cost of
interchange Non -road based peak utilization of
Queuing time public transport Waiting time mode Waiting time
Unified ticketing
personal safety bicycle parking feeder services system
PTI part of real
property safety station Feeder services
Peak utilization of
bicycle storage modes
Distribution
transfer facility network
Pedestrian Transfer
parking capacity facility
Drop off/ Pick up max accumulation
PARAMETERS FOR
PARAMETERS PIRATE MIMIC HONGKONG STUDY UTILITY FUNCTION DELHI MMTS STUDY

PHYSICAL Security Single level Interchange Connectivity
DESIGN Equipment Functionality services environment subways between levels
Designing for
Surveillance Aesthetic design Toilets security transfer facilities legibility of layout
Ticketing Walking Distances Seating areas waiting areas

Automated
ticket vending Protected
machines walkways ease of access
Commercial Overall lighting
facilities Level change of 120-15o lux ease of egress
shopping transfer between
facilities Ramp availability levels
Car & bike Elevator Ticket vending
rentals availability machines
waiting facilities Lift availability Disabled access

Safety waiting
waiting rooms areas queuing space
guide routes for
toilets blinds
catering Disabled access

Integrated
OVERALL interchange real time
PERFORMANCE Safety & security management Integrated safety information Integration
passenger
Image of perception of
personal safety interchange capacity comfort pedestrian safety Efficiency
Minimize
walking
property safety Urban Setting distance Property safety
Efficiency Functionality Safety Functionality
Integrated
Passenger interchange
coordination Cleanliness facilities management
Shops and retail Security
Efficiency services personnel Easy layout
operation Cost of travel Pedestrian safety
Information Urban setting
Shops and retail
Placement services
Legibility
HONGKONG PARAMETERS FOR
PARAMETERS PIRATE MIMIC STUDY UTILITY FUNCTION DELHI MMTS STUDY

Multi level car Weather protected
parking stacking areas link
pedestrian
Drop off area pathways Drop off area
no conflict
among modes Parking areas
loading areas Peripheral bus bay

Walking
distance less Bus stop
than 500m performance
weather
protected link
peripheral saw-
toothed bus
bay
Real time Pre- trip Pre-trip

C. INFORMATION information information CCTV information
Total Travel Real time Travel time
time information Maps information
PA RA M E T E R S U N D E R S C O P E O F
S T UPLANNING
LOCAL DY: LOGISTICAL AND OVERALL
AND LANDUSE OPERATIONAL PHYSICAL DESIGN PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
Network connectivity Connectivity Integration with
Entrance accessibility between modes between levels urban setting Pre-trip information
Time synchronised
operation between Efficiency of Travel time
Legibility modes legibility of layout interchnage information
Rail-street movement Frequency of service waiting areas Property safety
Rail PTI movement waiting time ease of access Functionality
Integrated
Street- street Unified ticketing interchange
movement system ease of egress management
Pedestrian linkage to transfer between
catchment area feeder services levels Easy layout
Peak utilization of Ticket vending
conflict among modes modes machines Pedestrian safety
Walking distance Distribution network Disabled access Urban setting
Shops and retail
Weather protected link queuing space services
Drop off area
Parking areas
Peripheral bus bay
Bus stop performance
DOMAIN OF WORK
B R O A D S T U DY D O M A I N S
BUILT FACILITY DESIGN TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE TRANSPORT PLANNING
EFFICIENT DESIGN INTEGRATED INFRASTRUCTURE MGMT FEEDER ROUTES

PROPERTY SAFETY PRE- TRIP INFORMATION TIME SYNCHRONISED
OPERATION
LEGIBILITY OF LAYOUT REAL TIME INFORMATION NETWORK CONNECTIVITY
BETWEEN MODES
DISABLED ACCESS PEDESTRIAN LINKAGE TO CATCHMENT FREQUENCY OF SERVICE
AREA
ENTRANCE ACCESSIBILITY PARKING/DROP OFF AREA PEAK UTILIZATION OF MODES
RETAIL SERVICES BUS BAYS DISTRIBUTION NETWORK
WEATHER PROTECTED LINK UNIFIED TICKETING SYSTEM PEDESTRIAN FLOWS
TICKET VENDING INTEGRATION
MACHINES
WAITING AREA VOLUME OF INTERCHANGE
QUEUING SPACE TRANSFER STAGE
EASE OF ACCESS/EGRESS LINE HAUL STAGE
CONNECTIVITY BETWEEN
LEVELS
STUDY TOOLS
&
DATA ANALYSIS PROCESSES
S T U DY T O O L S :
MIMIC
INTERCHANGE SITE & USER & EXPERT
CATCHMENT AREA SURVEY for
•Trip factors
•Individual
factors
BARRIERS OF •Interchange
INTERMODALITY factors
Questionnaire INTERCHANGE
on catchment DELINEATION OF DECONSTRUCTI
area CATCHMENT AREA CLASSIFICATION OF ON
BARRIERS
GIS mapping MICRO
SIMULATION
ON SITE SURVEY
NESTED
CHANGE IN DEMAND
LOGIT
MODEL RESPONSE FOR
VARIATION IN FACTORS
COST EFFECTIVE SOLUTIONS

FOR EACH BARRIER CATEGORY
S T U DY O N D ATA A N A LY S I S P R O C E S S E S : G A P
A N A LY S I S
AIM TOOLS
USER AND EXPERT SURVEY
on
• Trip factors
BARRIER • Interchange factors
IDENTIFICATI • Individual factors DATA ANALYSIS
ON
INTERCHANGE
DECONSTRUCTION
• marking Calculation of mean marks:
• ranking for
• visual profiling matrices
importance m(i) = Σ Mj(i)
• energy, distance, time
matrices nΣni
MICROSIMULATION MODEL
Mj(i) is the mark given to factor i by
Totally Moderately Extremely individual j;
unimportant Important important i = 1,...,K is the generic factor considered,
with K the total number of door-to-door
1 5 9 factors listed in the questionnaires;
j = 1,...,n is the generic individual
interviewed, with n the total number of
interviewees;
ni is the number of interviewees who
circled HUB:
FORMULATION OF FRAMEWORK & GUIDELINES FOR MULTIMODAL TRANSPORT an ‘N’ inArea:
Study the Sealdah
question referring
Interchange, to
Kolkata
S T U DY O N D ATA A N A LY S I S
PROCE S S EPROFILING
VISUAL S : I n t e rMATRICES
c h a n g e D e c o n s t r u cTIME,
t i o nENERGY, DISTANCE MATRICES
Dist Spee Time Ener
(m) d (s) gy (J)
(m/s)
Horizontal 200 1.34 149. 52.1
walking 2
( outside)
Horizontal 50 1.34 37.3 13.0
walking
( inside)
Horizontal 10 1.34 7.5 2.6
walking
( platform
distance)
Stairs (up) 3.5 .30 11.7 10.9
Stairs(down) .34 12.1 6.0
R – ramps B – barriers
H – handrails P - Pavement
obstacle
S T U DY O N D ATA A N A LY S I S
PAR Osimulation
C E S S E S is
: M IaC Rtechnique
O S I M U L ATfor
I O Nusing computers to imitate, or
simulate, the operations of various kinds of real-world facilities or
processes.
•It looks at the interaction of
individual "units" such as people or
vehicles –AGENT BASED APPROACH
• Each unit is treated as an

autonomous entity and the
interaction of the units is allowed
vary depending on stochastic
(randomized) parameters
• each unit is represented by a record

containing a unique identifier and a
set of associated attributes – e.g. a
list of vehicles
FORMULATION with known
OF FRAMEWORK origins, FOR MULTIMODAL TRANSPORT HUB: Study Area: Sealdah Interchange, Kolkata
& GUIDELINES
S T U DY T O O L S : P I R AT E
INTERCHANGE AREA
PARAMETR SELECTION
Priority Priority
rating by PRIORITISING THE rating by
PARAMETERS
user group expert
User Operato group
Perceived perspect r Targeted
QoS ive perspect QoS
Desired QUALITY OF SEVRVICE ive Delivered
QoS QoS
Minimum
QoS
GAP ANALYSIS
Establishing Stable
Demand – Supply priorities – using
analysis SD and mean mark
PROPOSAL FOR
INTERCHANGE
IMPROVEMENT
S T U DY O N D ATA A N A LY S I S P R O C E S S E S : L O S
10
PRIORITISATION USER GROUP 9
OF PARAMETERS SURVEY:
8
UNDER PROVISIONED
7
INTERCHANGE UG 1: W+R, P+R,
6
Importance
PERFORMANCE R+R, C+R
5
4
• perceived UG2: Non users
3
quality of service
2
OVER PROVISIONED
1
• delivered quality
of service 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Perceived LOS
• desired quality EXPERT GROUP
of service SURVEY
I>LOS = Under provision
I<LOS = Over provision
• targeted quality PG1: operators Totally Moderately Extremely
of service unimportant Important important
• min acceptable PG2:Planners and 1 5 9

quality of service administrative Totally Moderately Very
machinery displeased satisfied pleased
A N A LY S I S
USER GROUPS EXPERT GROUPS Priority, Perceived QoS, Expected QoS
,Minimum QoS
Age wise Gender wise Operator - planner Delivered QoS, Targeted QoS
Mode wise
High SD = less probability of the
issue to be solved
Consistently high mean value for 3.5
priority = More stable a candidate
6 for development 3
2.5
5
2
4
1.5
UG1
3 UG2
1
PG1
PG1
2 0.5
0
1 PG1-UG1 PG1-UG1 UG1-UG2 PG1-PG2 PG2-UG1 PG2-UG2
feeder routes
0 Walking distance
feeder routes Walking distance Unified Ticketing waiting time
Gap in mean value for parameter priority Gap in SD value between groups for parameter priority
A N A LY S I S
• perceived LoS
• delivered LoS PERCEIVED

LOS (USER)
GAP
• desired LoS
• targeted LoS MIN TARGETED DESIRED

LOS LOS (OPERATOR) LOS (USER)
• min acceptable LoS
? WILLINGNESS TO PAY – USER

? SUBSIDIES - GOVERNMENT
OPTIMUM VALUES OF LOS
GUIDELINES & FRAMEWORK
INFERENCES RELEVANT TO
STUDY AREA
Kolkata
G U I D E L I N E F O R M AT I O N :
STUDY
FORMATION IMPLEMENTATION
OF OF
GUIDELINES GUIDELINES
To derive the LOS values for interchange, user and

expert survey would be conducted at:
DUMDUM INTERCHANGE
INFERENCE: SHORTLISTING OF PARAMETERS
Methodology ( BARRIERS & ATTRACTION) under
TRANSPORT INFRA. & PLNG
SURVEY FOR
SURVEY FOR SURVEY OF
• perceived LoS PRIORITISATION OF
SATISFACTION OPERATORS FOR
PARAMETERS ( USER+
(USER + EXPERT) CATCHMENT AREA
• delivered LoS EXPERT)
• desired LoS DERIVING LEVEL OF SERVICE

VALUES
• targeted LoS
• min acceptable GAP ANALYSIS

LoS USER SURVEY FOR
WILLINGNESS TO
PAY
ARRIVING AT OPTIMUM LEVELS
FROM DEMAND SUPPLY & COST
BENEFIT ANALYSIS
GENERAL FRAMEWORK AND

GUIDELINES
Kolkata
S E A L D A H I N T E RC H A N G E
ransport modes at the interchange:
1. S U B R U R B A N R A I LWA Y S
2. BUS TRANSIT
3. PA R AT R A N S I T
4. M E T R O (upcoming)
Major issues at the interchange:
• Conflict of flows
• Congestion
• Pedestrian safety
• Parking space
Application of the formulated guidelines

Detailed planning of selected parameters
REFERENCES
1. Terzis, G (2000) GUIDE: Group for Urban Interchanges Development and Evaluation ,
MVA Consultants
2. Coccia Enzo (2002), PIRATE
3. Wardman Mark, Hine Julian, Stradling Stephen (2001), Interchange and Travel Choice,
Vol-1, Vol-2., DETR
4. South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (2001), MIMIC: Mobility, Intermodality
and Interchange, EU Commission under Transport
5. A study of intermodal transport Coordination and its contribution to Sustainable urban
transportation In Hong Kong (2001), Lui Kwok Wai, William, unpublished dissertation
work.
6. Singh Y.P. (2002), “Performance of Kolkata Metro railway: A case study.” CODATUX Pa.,
337 – 342.
7. KMDA. “Master Plan for Traffic & Transportation for Kolkata Metropolitan Area - 2025,”
Report.
8. C. Jotin Khisti, B. Kent Lall, Prentice Hall of India Private Limited, Transportation
Engineering
FORMULATION An Introduction
OF FRAMEWORK & GUIDELINES FOR MULTIMODAL TRANSPORT HUB: Study Area: Sealdah Interchange, Kolkata
END..

MMTI Literature Review

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

MMTI Literature Review

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

FORMULATION OF FRAMEWORK

AND GUIDELINES FOR MULTIMODAL

Study Area: Sealdah Interchange, Kolkata

multimodal transport hub facilitates-

•R a i l f a c i l i t i e s •Passenger waiting area

TOLLYGUNJ BUS DEPOT

TOLLYGUNJ TRAM DEPOT

•To enable the establishment of quality focused multimodal transport

• To co-coordinate the use of different modes and their proper integration to

LEVEL OF SERVICE APPROACH SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS APPROACH

LOS values Methodology for Estimation of demand

Recommendation of Design standards /

Study on Mobility, Intermodality and Interchanges (MIMIC)

Study on interchange and catchment area – 30 European interchanges of four sc

Study on interchange and catchment area –a sample of 22 European interchang

Multi Modal Transportation System Planning and Design- unpublished

A study of intermodal transport Coordination and its contribution to

An analysis of Transport Interchanges in west rail – unpublished

Study on interchange and west rail network – Hong Kong

• It can describe the action of interchanging, as undertaken by

• But it can also mean a location where interchange takes place.

the act of changing between mode – interchange

the place where one changes between modes – interchange zone

a purpose-built facility to improve interchange quality – interchange

We regard the utility of having to interchange (Uint) as having three principal

Expressed as a linear-additive function, this utility of interchange is:

So utility of travel can be

than those contained in Uint

I (ii) Transfer Time Value

PJ = position in journey where •(iii)

ameters of study have been catergorised under the following heads:

Drop off/ Pick up max accumulation

Ticketing Walking Distances Seating areas waiting areas

waiting facilities Lift availability Disabled access

catering Disabled access

loading areas Peripheral bus bay

Real time Pre- trip Pre-trip

EFFICIENT DESIGN INTEGRATED INFRASTRUCTURE MGMT FEEDER ROUTES

COST EFFECTIVE SOLUTIONS

• Each unit is treated as an

• each unit is represented by a record

• min acceptable PG2:Planners and 1 5 9

• delivered LoS PERCEIVED

• targeted LoS MIN TARGETED DESIRED

? WILLINGNESS TO PAY – USER

OPTIMUM VALUES OF LOS

GUIDELINES & FRAMEWORK

To derive the LOS values for interchange, user and

• desired LoS DERIVING LEVEL OF SERVICE

• min acceptable GAP ANALYSIS

GENERAL FRAMEWORK AND

Major issues at the interchange:

Application of the formulated guidelines

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen