Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
Modelling travel time in urban networks: comparable measures for private car and public transport
Highlights Modal accessibility disparity is often quantified with incompatible methods. Travel time measurements are highly sensitive to the calculation methods used. A door-to-door approach also suits modal travel time comparison in absolute terms. Even relative travel time comparisons need conceptually corresponding methods. Comparable multimodal accessibility analyses greatly benefit from open data sources.
Abstract Analysing the accessibility disparity between different travel modes is recognised as an efficient way to assess the environmental and social sustainability of transport and land use arrangements. Travel times by different travel modes form an essential part of such an analysis. This paper aims to assess the comparability of different methods for calculating travel time by different travel modes. First, we briefly review the methods used in previous studies and identify different typical approaches, which we then compare. We use three computational models respectively for car and public transport (PT), implemented in our case study area, the capital region of Finland. In the car models, (1) the simple model ignores congestion and parking in travel time calculation; (2) the intermediate car model accounts for congestion but ignores parking; and (3) the more advanced car model takes into account all parts of the journey, including congestion and parking. For PT, (1) the simple model accounts for transit routes but ignores schedules; (2) the intermediate model incorporates schedule data in a simplistic way; and (3) the more advanced model adopts a door-to-door approach where true schedules (incl. congestion) and realistic route combinations are accounted for. Our results show that absolute differences in car and PT travel times are notable in the Greater Helsinki area, no matter which models are used for comparison. Modal travel time disparity appears smallest in the city centre area. We conclude that using conceptually corresponding models for car and PT travel time calculations is the key to achieving a reliable analysis of modal accessibility disparity. A door-to-door approach in travel time calculations (adopted in the most advanced models) also makes the results truly comparable in absolute terms. Finally, the more advanced the applied methods are, the more data hungry the analysis is. Here, recent developments in open data policies among urban transport data producers become very helpful.
Modelling travel time in urban networks: comparable measures for private car and public transport
Highlights Modal accessibility disparity is often quantified with incompatible methods. Travel time measurements are highly sensitive to the calculation methods used. A door-to-door approach also suits modal travel time comparison in absolute terms. Even relative travel time comparisons need conceptually corresponding methods. Comparable multimodal accessibility analyses greatly benefit from open data sources.
Abstract Analysing the accessibility disparity between different travel modes is recognised as an efficient way to assess the environmental and social sustainability of transport and land use arrangements. Travel times by different travel modes form an essential part of such an analysis. This paper aims to assess the comparability of different methods for calculating travel time by different travel modes. First, we briefly review the methods used in previous studies and identify different typical approaches, which we then compare. We use three computational models respectively for car and public transport (PT), implemented in our case study area, the capital region of Finland. In the car models, (1) the simple model ignores congestion and parking in travel time calculation; (2) the intermediate car model accounts for congestion but ignores parking; and (3) the more advanced car model takes into account all parts of the journey, including congestion and parking. For PT, (1) the simple model accounts for transit routes but ignores schedules; (2) the intermediate model incorporates schedule data in a simplistic way; and (3) the more advanced model adopts a door-to-door approach where true schedules (incl. congestion) and realistic route combinations are accounted for. Our results show that absolute differences in car and PT travel times are notable in the Greater Helsinki area, no matter which models are used for comparison. Modal travel time disparity appears smallest in the city centre area. We conclude that using conceptually corresponding models for car and PT travel time calculations is the key to achieving a reliable analysis of modal accessibility disparity. A door-to-door approach in travel time calculations (adopted in the most advanced models) also makes the results truly comparable in absolute terms. Finally, the more advanced the applied methods are, the more data hungry the analysis is. Here, recent developments in open data policies among urban transport data producers become very helpful.
Modelling travel time in urban networks: comparable measures for private car and public transport
Salonen, Maria (Autor:in) / Toivonen, Tuuli (Autor:in)
Journal of Transport Geography ; 31 ; 143-153
01.01.2013
11 pages
Aufsatz (Zeitschrift)
Elektronische Ressource
Englisch
Modelling travel time in urban networks: comparable measures for private car and public transport
Online Contents | 2013
|DOAJ | 2016
|Value of Travel Time for Public Transport Passenger in Urban and Intercity Trip
British Library Conference Proceedings | 2016
|Changing patterns of urban travel Part 2. public transport and future patterns of travel
Taylor & Francis Verlag | 1986
|Public Transport Travel-Time Variability Definitions and Monitoring
Online Contents | 2015
|