Dwell‐Time Effects of Low‐Floor Bus Design
Publication: Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 120, Issue 6
Abstract
The low‐floor bus design is generally recognized as an effective tool for serving the population of transit passengers with disabilities. This design, in which the main platform is reached with a single step from curb level, is evaluated here for its potential to reduce dwell times of buses in regular service with regard to the nondisabled population as well. Three data sources were developed in cooperation with the Ann Arbor (Michigan) Transportation Authority; a regular service sample in which the full range of fare‐payment media was used, a special shuttle sample, in which all fares were prepaid, and a limited wheelchair trial. Descriptive analysis of the data as well as multiple regression modeling indicate dwell‐time savings accruing to the low‐floor bus design overall. Ranges of potential savings by passenger type and fare payment media are also estimated. The study concludes that exclusive of benefits in wheelchair passenger boarding times, the low‐floor design may shorten general passenger boarding and alighting time by 13–15%.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Blennemann, F. (1991a). “The low floor bus concept—advantages for the elderly and handicapped.” Proc. Plng. and Transp. Res. and Comput. (Int.) Co. Meeting. Planning and Transportation Research and Computing, London, U.K., Vol. P349, 29–42.
2.
Blennemann, F. (1991b). “Passenger‐friendly and disabled‐friendly low‐floor buses in Bremen.” Public Transp Int., 4, 398–413.
3.
Cundill, M., and Watts, P. (1973). “Bus boarding and alighting times.” TRRL Rep. LR 521, Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, U.K.
4.
Guenthner, R., and Hamat, K. (1988). “Transit dwell time under complex fare structure.” J. Transp. Engrg., ASCE, 114(3), 367–379.
5.
Guenthner, R. P., and Sinha, K. C. (1983). “Modeling bus delay due to passenger boardings and alightings.” Transp. Res. Rec. 915, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 7–13.
6.
“Highway capacity manual.” (1985). Spec. Rep. 209, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.
7.
Hoey, W., and Levinson, H. (1975). “Bus capacity analysis.” Transp. Res. Rec. 546, 30–41.
8.
Johansson, T. (1991). “In tampere vorgestellt: Finnischer niederflurbus.” Der Stadtverhehr, Freiburg, Germany, 36, 12–13 (in German).
9.
Kraft, W., and Bergen, T. (1974). “Evaluation of passenger service times for street transit systems.” Transp. Res. Rec. 505, 13–20.
10.
Levinson, H. (1983). “Analyzing transit travel time performance.” Transp. Res. Rec. 915, 1–6.
11.
Marshall, L. (1990). “Bus service times and capacities in Manhattan.” Transp. Res. Rec. 1266, 189–196.
12.
Potter, S. (1985). “Bus design takes passenger needs on board.” Design, 441, 15.
13.
“Recommended specification for buses used to operate local services to improve accessibility for passengers with mobility disabilities.” (1990). Int. J. of Vehicle Des., Disabled Persons' Transport Advisory Committee. 11(4/5), 454–467.
14.
Vandebona, U., and Richardson, A. (1985). “The effects of fares‐collection strategies on transit level of service.” Transp. Res. Rec. 1036, 79–87.
15.
Zografos, K., and Levinson, H. (1986). “Passenger service times for a no‐fare bus system.” Transp. Res. Rec. 1051, 42–48.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 120 • Issue 6 • November 1994
Pages: 914 - 929
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Sep 13, 1993
Published online: Nov 1, 1994
Published in print: Nov 1994
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.