TY - JOUR
T1 - Trip assignment model for timed-transfer transit systems
AU - Shih, Mao Chang
AU - Mahmassani, Hani S.
AU - Baaj, M. Hadi
PY - 1997
Y1 - 1997
N2 - A trip assignment model for timed-transfer transit systems is presented. Previously proposed trip assignment models focused on uncoordinated transit systems only. In timed-transfer transit systems, routes arc coordinated and scheduled to arrive at transfer stations within preset time windows. Thus, passenger at coordinated operations terminals may fare a choice among simultaneously departing buses serving alternative routes (unlike the case for uncoordinated operations terminals, where passengers generally board the first vehicle to arrive). A general trip assigment model it proposed that applies different assignment rules for three types of transfer terminals: uncoordinated operations terminals, coordinated operations terminals with a common headway for all routes, and coordinated operations terminals with integer-ratio headways for all routes. In addition, the care of missed connections at transfer termnals (due to vehicle arriving behind schedule) is accounted for. The model has been implemented in the LISP computer language, whose "list" data structure is specially suited to handle path search and enumeration. Results from an application to an example network with defferent combinations of terminal operations and headways indicate the following: (a) demand tends to be assigned to higher-frequqncy paths in the uncordinated transit network: (b) demand is more concentrated, and tends to be assigned to paths with higher frequency and lower travel cost in the cordinated transit network: and (c) missed connections has no significant effects on trip assingment.
AB - A trip assignment model for timed-transfer transit systems is presented. Previously proposed trip assignment models focused on uncoordinated transit systems only. In timed-transfer transit systems, routes arc coordinated and scheduled to arrive at transfer stations within preset time windows. Thus, passenger at coordinated operations terminals may fare a choice among simultaneously departing buses serving alternative routes (unlike the case for uncoordinated operations terminals, where passengers generally board the first vehicle to arrive). A general trip assigment model it proposed that applies different assignment rules for three types of transfer terminals: uncoordinated operations terminals, coordinated operations terminals with a common headway for all routes, and coordinated operations terminals with integer-ratio headways for all routes. In addition, the care of missed connections at transfer termnals (due to vehicle arriving behind schedule) is accounted for. The model has been implemented in the LISP computer language, whose "list" data structure is specially suited to handle path search and enumeration. Results from an application to an example network with defferent combinations of terminal operations and headways indicate the following: (a) demand tends to be assigned to higher-frequqncy paths in the uncordinated transit network: (b) demand is more concentrated, and tends to be assigned to paths with higher frequency and lower travel cost in the cordinated transit network: and (c) missed connections has no significant effects on trip assingment.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=3843138429&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=3843138429&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3141/1571-04
DO - 10.3141/1571-04
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:3843138429
SN - 0361-1981
SP - 24
EP - 30
JO - Transportation Research Record
JF - Transportation Research Record
IS - 1571
ER -