Bus Priority Systems Research Articles

Reinforcement Learning for Efficient Bus Priority Systems: Balancing Transit Efficiency and Traffic Impact

Reinforcement Learning for Efficient Bus Priority Systems: Balancing Transit Efficiency and Traffic Impact

A microsimulation study of bus priority system with pre-signaling

The provision of transit priority has been shown to improve the performance of public transport, which is more efficient consumer of energy and space than private transport. On the other hand, the implementation of transit priority may also have disadvantages and penalize the general traffic. Thus, the design of the transit priority needs to balance these two opposing effects. This research aims to implement a bus priority system that utilizes a dedicated bus lane terminated upstream of the intersection, along with an additional signal, known as a pre-signal, at this location. A wide literature exists with studies of adaptive control pre-signals that are primarily focused on isolated intersections and concern simple traffic schemes. The current study investigates the performances of pre-signals in more realistic contexts through microsimulation and focuses specifically on two issues: the position of the pre-signal with respect to the main signal and the application domain of pre-signal strategies compared to the standard layouts of bus lanes, either continuous or interrupted.

Bus Priority at Traffic Signals—Evaluating Strategy Options

This article compares different strategy options for providing bus priority at traffic signals. The different strategies considered vary in the strength of the priority awarded and in the selection of the buses that are to receive priority. The strategies include so-called differential priority, where buses receive individual priority treatment according to some criterion such as lateness, and nondifferential priority, where all buses are treated in the same way.The strategies are compared using a simulation model, SPLIT, that has been developed and validated by the authors. The article describes some of the modelling issues that are involved in simulating bus priority systems and how they have been treated within the SPLIT model.

A framework for selecting bus priority system locations in medium-sized cities: Case study in Araraquara, Brazil

Prioritising public transport allows reducing externalities caused by the intense use of individual motorised transport and to increase the social well-being of the population. There is a lack of research in medium-sized cities, where commonly origin–destination data is not available. This study aims to provide a framework for selecting priority roads to implement bus lanes in medium-sized cities and the solution approach involves three major stages: (i) criteria selection; (ii) weighting of criteria using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP); and (iii) a case study and spatial analysis using Geographical Information System (GIS) tools. Selected criteria relate to demographic characteristics, land use, infrastructure and operation of the current public transport system. Results show a connected network, similar to an old public transport system that operated in the city where the case study was located, and also presenting an intrinsic relation between the built environment and the public transport system. The proposed framework fills the literature gap of applying AHP to implement priority public transport systems in cities without demand data and assists decision-making processes to better allocate resources to improve public transport infrastructure as it presents priority areas for intervention.

A linear bus rapid transit with transit signal priority formulation

In this paper, we propose a novel mathematical framework to formulate a unified Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) with Transit Signal Priority (TSP) system for single destination networks, namely, Bus Priority System Optimal Dynamic Traffic Assignment with Signal Control (BP SODTA-SC). This framework considers dedicated bus lanes, bus routes, and priority for public bus transport in mixed bus-car scenarios. Furthermore, this approach assures fairness to all road users. It is linear and can be applied to analyze city-size BRT-TSP systems. Our numerical results show that bus priority significantly reduces Total System-wide Passenger Travel Time (TSPT).

Implementation and Testing of Cooperative Bus Priority System in Connected Vehicle Environment

Most previous work on the bus priority operation problem merely focused on dedicated bus lanes or transit signal priority. With the advancement of wireless communication technologies and the development of vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure systems (i.e., connected vehicles), the opportunity has arisen to optimize traffic light, bus speed, and holding times at nearside bus stops simultaneously to provide priority for public buses. The study reported in this paper demonstrated the design and implementation of a cooperative bus priority system on the basis of connected vehicle technology. The system function, system architecture, and optimization strategies are presented. The system was deployed and validated at an intersection with two adjacent bus stops in Taicang City, Jiangsu Province, China. The results of the field test showed that the proposed system could reduce travel time and could decrease the number of stops. The successful demonstration showed that the potential was high for more efficient, integrated transit priority operation strategies on the basis of connected vehicles.

The way ahead for London's bus priority at traffic signals

London has a long history of successful schemes for bus priority at traffic signals. Recently, Transport for London (TfL) has procured a modern automatic vehicle location (AVL) system for bus fleet management, passenger information and bus priority. The new system is known as iBUS and is based on global positioning system (GPS) and supporting technologies for bus location. The system eliminates the need for on-street hardware for detecting buses and provides more flexibility and opportunity for using bus detectors. However, bus location based on this system is less accurate than location based on fixed infrastructure (e.g. beacons) and could result in reduced benefits from bus priority. This paper first summarises how bus priority at traffic signals works within iBUS, and then explores the effects of GPS locational errors on bus priority benefits. This is followed by a discussion of opportunities available in the context of iBUS to build an even more efficient and beneficial bus priority system by taking advantage of its cost-effective multiple detection capabilities. The paper is based on various studies carried out by the Transportation Research Group (TRG) at the University of Southampton for TfL.

Using global positioning system for bus priority in London: traffic signals close to bus stops

London's bus network is one of the largest and most comprehensive urban transport systems in the world. The contribution of buses is recognised by implementing a series of initiatives including bus priority at traffic signals. London has a long history of the implementation of bus priority at traffic signals. It has kept pace with the development of new technologies by updating its bus priority system. Now, London is moving towards a bus management system based on global positioning system (GPS), which will also be used to provide bus priority at traffic signals. The authors describe theoretical work carried out by TRG on behalf of Transport for London Bus Priority Team to tackle the challenge posed by locational error associated with GPS where a traffic signal is close to a bus stop.

AVL based Bus Priority at Traffic Signals

Recent developments in technologies such as Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) and advanced control systems have stimulated new interest in bus priority facilities using traffic signals. The use of AVL systems has generated opportunities for implementing flexible busspecific priority strategies according to performance. The extent of the opportunities available depends very much on the architecture of a bus priority system, including the location(s) of intelligence determining the priority level and its implementation, and the method of priority request to the traffic signal. These aspects are important from the point of view of bus priority performance, communication requirements and the cost of the system. This paper draws together and compares the various architectures currently being used for AVL-based bus priority, providing an overall review to supplement other papers which are usually concerned with individual systems. The paper reviews current bus priority systems used across Europe under five different architecture categories. The present bus priority architecture in London is then analysed in more detail as a case study. The paper concludes with a discussion of issues for this application, given the continuing advances in locations and communication technologies, and issues for the future.

Fastway—smarter, faster travel

Fastway is the new ‘smart’ bus service for the people of Crawley and Gatwick Airport in West Sussex and Horley in Surrey. Incorporating kerb guidance with bus priority and intelligent transport systems, the first phase has been delivered in less than three years from gaining Government acceptance for funding, and initial services started at the end of August 2003. This paper describes how a partnership of public and private organisations has developed an innovative approach to implementing a project that is aiming to offer a solution to some of the transport problems emerging in the Crawley area, and reports that early performance results are encouraging as Fastway starts to make an impact.

Fastway?smarter, faster travel

Fastway is the new ‘smart’ bus service for the people of Crawley and Gatwick Airport in West Sussex and Horley in Surrey. Incorporating kerb guidance with bus priority and intelligent transport systems, the first phase has been delivered in less than three years from gaining Government acceptance for funding, and initial services started at the end of August 2003. This paper describes how a partnership of public and private organisations has developed an innovative approach to implementing a project that is aiming to offer a solution to some of the transport problems emerging in the Crawley area, and reports that early performance results are encouraging as Fastway starts to make an impact.

Which technology for urban public transport?

The merits of alternative urban and inter-urban public transport systems have been the subject of some debate, particularly since the publication of the UK's 1998 transport policy White Paper A New Deal for Transport. This current paper aims to assess some of the conflicting empirical evidence in the UK and abroad in order to allow an objective assessment of the policy implications. Section 2 presents an overview of technical and financial characteristics of mainly urban public transport systems, including capital and operating costs of recent light rail, guided bus, bus priority and suburban rail systems. Section 3 explores the evidence on the wider costs and benefits of systems in the UK, including wider environmental and socio-economic impacts. Although more expensive to build (under similar conditions), light rail systems often carry more passengers than ‘intermediate’ bus-based systems such as guided bus and segregated busways. There is not much between public transport systems on the basis of operating costs per passenger-km, except metro systems, which are twice as expensive to run as bus-based systems. When comparing revenues and operating costs directly, all modes except suburban regional rail appear capable of covering operating costs overall, with light rail and some of London's suburban rail services providing a marginal surplus of revenue. Average speeds of light rail and bus-based systems are comparable. In heavily congested corridors, new light rail systems can reduce journey times significantly, but such reductions are lower for bus-based systems, mainly because of the relatively limited amount of segregated right of way and priority at traffic signals. This highlights the fact that bus priority systems act primarily as ‘congestion busters’ at hot spots, which can be implemented more flexibly and gradually than for rail-based systems. Currently, electric propulsion appears to be the best option to mitigate air pollution and noise. However, new clean vehicle technologies will soon be in a position to play a major role in reducing emissions, in particular for bus-based systems. In terms of external costs per bus/train-km, environmental costs appear higher than accident costs, but lower than congestion externalities.

Which technology for urban public transport?

The merits of alternative urban and inter-urban public transport systems have been the subject of some debate, particularly since the publication of the UK's 1998 transport policy White Paper A New Deal for Transport. This current paper aims to assess some of the conflicting empirical evidence in the UK and abroad in order to allow an objective assessment of the policy implications. Section 2 presents an overview of technical and financial characteristics of mainly urban public transport systems, including capital and operating costs of recent light rail, guided bus, bus priority and suburban rail systems. Section 3 explores the evidence on the wider costs and benefits of systems in the UK, including wider environmental and socio-economic impacts. Although more expensive to build (under similar conditions), light rail systems often carry more passengers than ‘intermediate’ bus-based systems such as guided bus and segregated busways. There is not much between public transport systems on the basis of operat...

Application Study of Petri-Net Simulator to Bus Traffic Simulation

For planning on bus priority systems, we need sensible to constrain from the real space on site. In this paper, we try fundamental study to apply Petri-net Traffic Simulator, which use visual net description of planning alternatives on the real space, to bus priority problem. The simulator has dealt with traffic flows of regular sized cars only. As buses are large sized cars, we first expand description net of traffic flow by introducing new type places denoted P (-3), which correspond to “bus presence in the block ” and occupy two blocks of regular sized cars. Next, we expand Vptimer.txt., which rules renewal of vehicle's desired speed in simulation, and add the renewal table for buses. We success construction and demonstration of mixed traffic flow net of regular and large sided cars using our software of Petri-net Traffic Simulator. We apply this expanded net to bus traffic simulation by adding other sub-nets like on-and-off service at bus stop. Finally, we construct simulation nets of both cases of on-and-off of bus priority lane at real road in Kanazawa and do some verification discussion.

An Experimental Study on Effects of Bus Priority System

Recently, some effective measures as TDM (Transport Demand Management) have beendesired to improve the urban transport problems including the environmental pollution. Especially, the public transport systems should be essential to consider the urban transport problems, because of both of direct effects like the mitigation of environmental pollution based on the reduction of traffic volume, and indirect effects like the encouragement of common sense for sustainability. In this paper, the effects and future issues concerned with the bus priority system introducedin Sakai City of Osaka, which consisted of PTPS (Public Transport Priority Systems), MOCS (Mobile Operation Control Systems) and other systems like traffic regulation and/or information for publicity, were analyzed based on some viewpoints such as users' convenience, influence on traffic flow and agreements of such system for both residents and drivers. These findings will be expected to be significantly helpful to introduce such systems to improve the transport problems in urban areas.

ITS applications in public transport: Improving the service to the transport system

AbstractThis paper examines all the disparate technologies and techniques capable of smoothing the integration of public transport modes and services at both the urban and interurban scale. The paper focuses on the application of information technology and telematics solutions which have been designed to create as seamless a journey as possible from the point of view of the transport system user. The scope of the paper is therefore deliberately wide‐ranging and includes an examination of measures as apparently unconnected as smartcard ticketing, bus priority systems, automatic vehicle locationing, trip planning and on‐board information systems as well as new public transport services offering demand responsive travel and integration with taxi services. The paper intends to show how such technological solutions can be used to increase the attractiveness and competitiveness of fixed public transport networks in comparison to the door‐to‐door flexibility of the private car.

BUS PRIORITIES: A SOLUTION TO URBAN CONGESTION ?

Keywords LONDON TRANSPORT BUSES TRANSPORT, URBAN, CONGESTION, BUSES, PRIORITY, POLICIES, PUBLIC, PEDESTRIANS, SUSTAINABLE, DEVELOPMENT, STRATEGIES, TRAFFIC, CONTROL, MANAGEMENT, ROUTES, NETWORKS, SYSTEMS, CITIES, ROADS LONDON UK... Show All

Light rail and bus priority systems: Choice or blind commitment?

The debate over light rail transit (LRT) systems is often a confrontation between advocates and opponents of LRT systems. It is difficult to separate real evidence from opinion about LRT. This paper reviews evidence and viewpoints about LRT systems in comparison to bus priority systems (BPS), the latter often combined with high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes. Bus-rail comparisons are difficult because people tend to think of existing bus services which are constrained to share congested roads with cars for most of their routes. Extensive dedicated busways or HOV lanes are more akin to LRT systems, and there are few examples of these bus priority operations. BPSs are capable of moving comparable volumes of people at less cost than LRT. Where BPS and HOV systems are in use, they appear to move more people than are being moved in established LRT systems. LRT systems may have an advantage in influencing land-use in a way which will promote greater reliance on public transit, but it appears that similar impacts can be achieved by bus-based systems. There is a need for closer study and analysis of busways and HOV lanes. It is also important to recognize that neither BPS nor LRT are likely to have much impact on overall mode split unless substantial steps are taken to discourage single occupant motor vehicles.

Socially and environmentally appropriate urban futures for the motor car

In its relatively short life, the automobile has provided a level of mobility unlikely to have been feasible with a reliance on conventional forms of land based public transport. It has contributed in both a positive and negative way to the quality of life, transforming our cities, our way of life, and giving us a greater command over time and space. Concern over the undesirable social and environmental impacts has increased over time, with calls for governments to take action to reduce the automobile's dominant role. New investment in fixed-track public transport and bus priority systems together with strategies to discourage travel have been proposed to improve accessibility and to aid in cleaning up the physical environment. This paper reviews some of the issues facing society as it works to identify policies to achieve an economically and environmentally sustainabie future. There is a need for a broader set of policies to facilitate alternative land use-transport lifestyles while facing appropriate pricing signals. Some of the key issues are adjustments in the relative prices of location and transport, spatial incentives to make public transport economically viable (i.e. changing urban densities, zoning/incentive changes to allow more infill), road pricing (i.e. charging cars the economic cost of using the roads), new information technology systems (e.g. IVHS) to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of transport infrastructure, major improvements in the fuel efficiency of fossil fuelled vehicles, and alternative-fuelled vehicles (“clean-air vehicles”).

The contribution of expert opinion to the design of high capacity bus priority systems

The need in developing countries for high capacity bus priority systems is briefly explained, and two examples of such systems found in Brazil are introduced. The differences between the systems are considered to be the result of preferences and biases held by the engineers who designed them. The concept of expertise is considered to include three types of expert knowledge: facts, models and opinion. The third of these is described and a model suggested to facilitate the automation of such decision processes.