Analysis of On‐Time Performance of Bus Services Using Simulation
Publication: Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 116, Issue 4
Abstract
Applications of a microcomputer‐based Monte Carlo simulation model for analyzing the impact of different operating strategies (e.g., additional time points, bus priority, and demand profile) on two measures of quality of service of fixed‐route bus services are discussed. Two fundamental service quality measures, i.e., headway variations and the degree of adherence to schedules (on‐time performance), are considered. It is shown that simulation can provide the necessary insight needed for planning bus‐service operations when journey speeds, passenger demand, and route characteristics are uncertain. For instance, it is demonstrated that when the interstop journey speed of a route is normally distributed, the deterioration in on‐time performance with respect to dispatch time is a direct function of the variance of the distribution. There is also certain limit to the number of time points that can have a positive influence on headway variations and on‐time performance. This paper describes the use of the simulation model for identifying the optimal number of time points and for assigning them to the route to achieve the desired on‐time performance level.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Abkowitz, M., Amir, E., and Englestein, I. (1986). “Optimal control of headway variations on transit routes.” J. Advanced Transp., 20(1), 73–88.
2.
Abkowitz, M., and Englestein, I. (1984). “Methods for maintaining transit service regularity.” Transp. Res. Rec., 961, 1–8.
3.
Andersson, P. A., et al. (1979). “Analysis and simulation of an urban bus route.” Transp. Res., 13trr A(6), 439–466.
4.
Bates, J. W. (1986). “Definition of practices for bus transit on‐time performance: Preliminary study.” Transportation Research Circular No. 300, Trans. Res. Board, Washington, D.C., Feb.
5.
Bly, P. H., and Jackson, R. L. (1974). “Evaluation of bus control strategies by simulation.” Laboratory Report 637, Transp. and Road Res. Lab., Crowthorne, U.K.
6.
Canadian transit handbook. (1986). 2nd Ed., Canadian Urban Transit Assoc. and Road and Transp. Assoc. of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
7.
Ceder, A. (1981). “Practical methodology for determining dynamic changes in bus travel time.” Transp. Res. Rec., 798, 18–22.
8.
Cederlund, H.‐Å. (1987). “A statistical analysis of short‐term measurements for buses and timetable planning with regard to cost aspects.” VTI meddelande 506, Swedish Road and Transp. Res. Inst., Linköping, Sweden (in Swedish).
9.
Koffman, D. (1978). “A simulation study of alternative real time bus headway control strategies.” Transp. Res. Rec., 663, 41–46.
10.
Levinson, H. S. (1983). “Analyzing transit travel time performance.” Transp. Res. Rec., 915, 1–6.
11.
Turnquist, M. (1978). “A model for investigating the effects of service frequency and reliability on bus passenger waiting times.” Transp. Res. Rec., 663, 70–73.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 116 • Issue 4 • July 1990
Pages: 517 - 531
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 ASCE.
History
Published online: Jul 1, 1990
Published in print: Jul 1990
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.