TRANSMILENIO

ENRIQUE LILLO

EMME/2 UGM

May 2002

Bogotá

7 million people

Mean annual population growth of4,5 % over the last 10 years

25 % of Colombian GDP

US$ 3 300 GDP per Capita

Transport indicators

1 million automobiles moving 19% of the population

30 000 buses moving 72% of the population

Mean bus speed during peak hour: 7 km/hr

Approximately 650 bus lines

Approximately 22 000 registered buses

On average a transit rider spent 2 hours and 20 minutes in transport per day

Public Transport: The Vehicles

Bus Corriente 26%65 passengersYear: < 90

Bus Intermedio 12%68 passengersYear: > 91

Bus Ejecutivo 9 %72 passengers All Years

Bta Ejecutiva 33%30 passengersYears: 75 - 92

Bta. Ejecutiva 4 %30 passengersYear: 93 >

Colectivos 16 %15 passengersAll years

Source: STT 1998

Public Transport: The Bus Network

Demand for Public Transport: Daily Pattern

0

200000

400000

600000

800000

1000000

1200000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

HORA

Pas

ajer

os

BUS AUTO TAXI

Demand for Public Transport: Socio-economic Strata

Demand for Public Transport : Travel Distance

Demand for Public Transport: Number of Transfers

Demand for Public Transport: Passenger Load

Corredor Pax/hr/direction PHM

Avenida Caracas 36,000

Calle 80 25,100

Autopista Norte 16,700

Norte Quito Sur 25,400

Avenida Suba 24,800

Avenida de las Américas 28,800

Figures correspond to the heaviest load per direction during the a.m. peak hourSource: From passenger counts, April 1999

Transmilenio: Concept

INFRASTRUCTURE Bus Only Lanes

Transfer Stations

Bus Stations

BUS LINES Trunk Routes

Feeder Lines

New Transit Agency

New Public Transport Providers

Fare Collection System

Remote Control System

New Vehicles

Transmilenio: Main Corridors

Transmilenio: Stations

Transfer Stations:

Main : Located at the end of the main corridors

Intermediate: Located along any of the main corridors

Transmilenio : Stations

Regular Stations:

Boarding and Alighting of Passengers

Transfers between trunk lines

Located along the main corridors

Transmilenio: Feeder Zones

Transmilenio: Feeder – Trunk Interaction

Feeder Zobe

Transfer Station

CBD

Feeder Line

Bus Stop

Transmilenio: Feeder – Trunk Interaction

Feeder 1Feeder 2

Trunk Route

COMMONSPACE

FAREINTEGRATION

Bus Operations: Formation of bus queues in stations

= saturation degree = Demand Rate / Service Rate

Queue Length L = 0.7*2/(1-)

Queue Formation

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

degree of saturation

Qu

eu

e L

en

gth

(b

use

s)

Bus Operations: Operational Parameters

x = time in station / available time

x = frequency *(time per bus)/ 3600

example f = 100 veh/h, t = 30 sec

x = 30*100 / 3600 = 0.83

fm= Maximum Frequency

Maximum x = 0,4

0,4=fm * t /3600

fm=1440 / t

C= Operational Capacity

C= passengers / hr

C = fm * Bus Capacity = 1440 * Bus Capacity / t

Bus Operations: Dwelling Time

Tp = to * tp * np

to: bus manoeuvring + door operations time

tp: time per passenger

np:number of passengers = bus capacity * R

R: loading factor

phase   oxford street

metro SP

approach sec 5 10open doors sec 2 2

board. and alight. sec 48 25close doors sec 2 5

resume route sec 2 10total sec 59 52fm Veh/h 24 33

bus capacity pas/veh 70 1700

Op. capacity Pas/h 1708 56100

Bus Operations: Operational Capacity C=1440/(to / bus capacity +tp*R) Single stop, one vehicle

Operational Scheme Bus cap.

to tp Operationalcapacity

  pas sec sec pas/h veh/h

van 15 10 3 1.137 76

minibus 35 11 3 1.575 45

bus 70 12 3 1.867 27

articulated - fare inside 160 13 1.5 3.777 24

Bi-articulated - fare inside 240 14 1.5 4.019 17

Articulated – at grade boarding 160 13 1 5.120 32

Bi- articulated – at g. b. 240 14 1 5.574 23

Articulated – at g. b. + fare outside 160 13 0.33 9.779 61

Bi-articulated at g.b. + fare outside

240 14 0.3 12.169 51

Bus Operations: Capacity as a function of R (demand)

0

2 000

4 000

6 000

8 000

10 000

12 000

14 000

16 000

18 000

20 000

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

R

pas

/h

Bus Operations: Speed and Frequency

Corredor Caracas

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160

frequency veh/hr

sp

ee

d k

m/h

Bus Operations: Fleet size and Frequency

Av. Caracas

0%

100%

200%

300%

400%

500%

600%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160

frequency veh/hr

fle

et

inc

rea

se

Bus Operations: Alternative 1 - Convoys

Capacity of a convoy of articulated buses

0

5

10

15

20

25

1 2 3 4 5 6

Vehicles per Convoy

000

pass

/hr

Bus Operations: Alternative 2 – Differentiated Stops

Segregated bus stops by destination

Local and Express Buses using two lanes per direction in the bus corridors

Platform A Platform B

Bus Operations: Station Design in Avenida Caracas

Strategic Modelling: Objectives

Forecast the demand

Describe the riders

Provide flexibility for simulation

Create appropriate interface with operational design

Provide functional and economic indicators

Create and model that can be updated

Strategic Modelling : Overall Design

Transmilenio Routes Transmilenio

Demand

Transmilenio Service Attributes

Transmilenio Riders

Revenue Calculation

Revenue Sharing

The Demand: Surveys and Counts

Public Transport Passenger and Vehicle Counts (250 000 records)

Boarding and Alighting (20 000 records)

Origin Destination Surveys on board ( 66 000 records)

Public Transport Users Counts in bus stops ( 3 000 records)

Traffic Counts at major intersections

Stated Preferences (1 989 interviews)

Spatial Distribution of the Demand

Origins Destinations

Analysis Zones

0 10 20 30

Kilometers

635 Zones: 606 Inside the study area and 29 outside

EMME/2 Model

635 zones

1904 nodes

8509 links

6 modes

400 public transport lines

Value of Time

Socio-Economic

Stratum

VOT Share of the total demand

1.0 - 1.5 15 $/min 2%

1.5 - 2.5 30 $/min 32%

2.5 – 3.5 45 $/min 65%

3.5 – 6.0 80 $/min 1%

Value of Time Estimated from SP survey

Results (1)

Results (2)

Results(3)

Results (4)

Results(5)

Sensibility Analysis: Fare and Competition

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

650 700 750 800 850

Fare (Col$)

Dem

and

Var

iatio

n

Con reestructuración

Sin reestructuración

Financial Equilibrium: $ 750

10% increase in fare creates a 10% reduction in demand

With strong competition the equilibrium point is 15% higherand the demand drops 25%

Weak Competition

Strong Competition

Sensibility Analysis: Speed and Competition

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

0% 10% 20%

Speed ReductionD

eman

d Var

iatio

n

Con reestrucuración

Sin reestrucuración

5 km/hr less creates a 20% demand reduction

With strong competition the demand drops 70 %

Weak Competition

Strong Competition

Most Common modelling errors (1)

OD Matrices

Obtained from household surveys

Zoning detail is not appropriate for modelling purposes

Lack of information

Automatic adjustments

Market segmentation

Market segmentation criteria

Not enough segments

Wrong Models

Fare system

Different Users

Erroneous simulation of pedestrian access

“ Slow Models”

Most Common modelling errors (2)

Perception of the new system

Commercial Speed

“New system” Effect

Some costs are not truly evaluated ( waiting time, walking time, etc.)

Competition

Fare

Level of Service

Changes in mobility patterns

Peak Hour behaviour

Changes in Land Use