Monitoring BRT Performance, Quality By Sam Zimmerman

1,009 views
886 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,009
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
40
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
51
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Monitoring BRT Performance, Quality By Sam Zimmerman

  1. 1. Monitoring BRT Performance, Quality By Sam ZimmermanFrancesco LayGoogle Earth
  2. 2. Presentation outline• Monitoring and linkage to system planning, operations and management• Selection of criteria, examples• Ahmedabad case study• Lessons learned
  3. 3. Why Monitor Quality and Performance?• PT is a business with products, industrial processes and customers; Need management information to meet objectives• BRT is an integrated system, but may be operated by different entities (e.g., service provider, fare collector, facility and infrastructure maintainer), with oversight and management by a public entity/SPV – Need quantitative basis for management, payment for services rendered, etc.• BRT services are inherently flexible; monitoring can provide data for planning service adjustments and other enhancements
  4. 4. Issues in Selection of Performance Monitoring Criteria• Utility of criteria – Need to link criteria to specific performance objectives for system• Complexity, cost of collection – Need to collect on an ongoing basis – Need to be consistent over time in definition of criteria and collection methodologies• Not just academic exercise; Need Linkage to action – Need linkages among criteria, causes of problems and corrective actions
  5. 5. Different Performance Monitoring Perspectives• Industrial/Supply: – What is the quality of the offering (product) in all aspects? – How efficient is the system in providing planned service?• Customer: – How effective is the BRT system in providing safe, secure, fast and reliable public transport? – Does the system meet customer needs and expectations?
  6. 6. Typical Industrial/Supply Criteria• Revenue V. Km., Hours• Reliability• Travel times (e.g., total end-to-end, station dwell times• Mean Km. between service disruptions• Percentage of scheduled trips started, completed• Vehicle/infrastructure/facility cleanliness, state of repair• Condition of fare collection, passenger information, other IT Systems and equipment• Operating & maintenance costs, labor loadings• Fuel consumption, emissions (e.g., particulate matter)• Degree of integration, e.g. docking accuracy at stations and terminals• Driving
  7. 7. Typical Criteria: Customer• Ridership related – Total, Max. load point/peak hour/peak direction, by route and corridor – By purpose, gender, income, time of day and week – Trip lengths, travel volumes among key O/D pairs – Length of time using system, former mode, frequency of use – Degree of crowding – Mode of access/egress• Safety, security – Incidents by type• Satisfaction with: – Operating staff, services, vehicles, facilities – Access provisions – Passenger information – Fares and fare payment
  8. 8. Applications of Data• City to city benchmarking is best used to determine whether quality and performance is unusual (better or worse than peers)• Need more detailed information to determine causes of problem and identify and evaluate what to do to fix them• Within city comparisons over time and from one corridor or line to another can be helpful in more detailed analysis and planning Vrs. Vrs.
  9. 9. Ahmedabad JANMARG Case Study* RTO to Maninagar loop– (22.5 kms.) – 33 bus stops Danilimda to Naroda (16.4 kms.) – 28 bus stops Bhavsar hostel – Delhi darwaja Sabarmati Rly. stn Naroda (4.5 kms.) – 6 bus stops Ranip Ahmedabad village Sola RoB Phase 2 corridors – under Airport. Naroda GIDC implementation RTO (41kms.) Naroda AEC Delhi Gujarat University darwaja Gandhigram Rly. stn Kalupur Rly. Odhav City of A Bopal Industrial Stn. estate Odhav Shivranjani Nehrunagar Soni ni chaali Geeta Maninagar Rly. Mandir stn. BRT corridor operational – 45 kms. Danilimda BRT corridor under implementation Vatva Industrial – 41 kms. estate Narol Total no. of Bus stations –67 Total Buses operational –83 (incl 11 AC buses) Daily ridership – 1,20,473Ahmedabad information taken from JANMARG’s 25th Monthly Report; Provided by CEPT University, Ahmedabad
  10. 10. Statistics At GlanceNetwork Length 45 KmNumber of Stations 67Operational Timings 6:00 AM to 11:30 PMPeak Hour 8:00 AM – 12:00 PM ; 5:00 PM – 9:00 PMBus operated during Peak 83 ( 75 on Diwali Festival)Total Fleet 88 (11 No. AC Buses included)Average Daily Round Trips 530Average Daily Ridership 1,20,473Average Daily Collection 7,44,384 Ave. Daily Operational Km. 19579 Km. (Schedule Km = 21096) * Op. Cit, JANMARG, CEPT University
  11. 11. Ahmedabad BRT• “Janmarg” Limited Corp., SPV in charge of fully integrated BRT system – Operating, fare collection, facility/infrastructure, maintenance contractors• Monthly reports• Analysis highlights changes over time• Open, transparent dissemination• Results used for oversight and management of contractors• Results provided to newspapers, radio, TV and made available on website
  12. 12. Ahmedabad Surveys Conducted Monthly• Bus Docking Survey• System Operator’s driving Check and bus Check• Bus stop Checklist including cleanliness• Average BRTS Speed Check• User Feedback Surveys * Op. Cit, JANMARG, CEPT University
  13. 13. Use of Output in Benchmarking• Two main applications 1. comparisons of past Ahmedabad BRT quality and performance with current Ahmedabad quality and performance 2. Comparison of performance of one corridor/line or operating contractor with others• Peer-to peer comparisons across cities much more difficult to do correctly, but EMBARQ/Volvo BRT Center of Excellence effort likely to be highly useful
  14. 14. System Indicators and Comparison (CEPT U.) 13rd Month (Previous Year) 24nd Month 25th Month Month/ Year (16 Oct– 15 Nov ’10) (15 Sept’11- 14 Oct’ 11) (15 Oct ’11- 14 Nov’ 11) R.T.O-Man., RTO to CN R.T.O-Man., R.T.O to Naroda R.T.O-Man., R.T.O to Naroda Route Anjali – Naroda .,Narol to Naroda Anjali – Naroda, N to N,RTO-SLP Anjali – Naroda, N to N,RTO-SLP Operation Timings 6:00 AM - 11:30 PM 6:00 AM - 11:30 PM 6:00 AM - 11:30 PM Total Kms/day 13800 KM 20208 KM 19579 KM Total Pax. 2538618 (373%) 4040794 (593.71%) 3730308Total fare collection (INR) 14352963 (471%) 23318700 (765.22%) 23052197 Avg. pax/day 81,891 (373%) 1,34,693 (613.50 %) 1,20,473 collection/day (INR) 463,000 (471%) 804093 (817.99 %) 814170 Avg. Pax./bus/day 1678 (74%) 1721 ( 177.75 %) 1462 Avg. Collectn/bus/day 9468 (110%) 10274.23 ( 232.70 %) 9035 Avg. Trip Length Week day 6.74 7.6 6.6 Weekend 6.64 7.05 6.2 fppk Week day 0.88 1.044 1.1 Weekend 0.88 0.94 0.96Operating Ratio for Bus 1.09 0.89 1.1 Operator Breakdown/ 10000 km 2.01 2.3 2.04 Accidents / 100000 Km 0.72 1.65 1.53 Avg.Speedof BRTS 24.2 Km/Hr 24.0 Km/Hr 23.58 Km/Hr
  15. 15. Sample Size: 472 Modal Shift*100% 9.13%90% 2.76% 9.55%80% 4.10%70% 31%60%50%40% 39.91%30%20%10% 0% AMTS Shared Rickshaw Rickshaw 2-Wheeler 4-wheeler Cycle Walk Drop * Op. Cit, JANMARG, CEPT University
  16. 16. JANMARG Miss Trips/ Incidents Analysis* Total No. Of Miss Trip During this month :139 ,Out of that following are the major cause for that:- 25 22 22 20 17 15 10 11 8 9 10 7 5 6 3 3 4 5 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 0 Total No. Of Miss Trip During Last month :147 ,Out of that following are the major cause for that:- 18 16 14 16Problem No. 15 12 13 13 10 12 12 8 10 9 6 8 4 6 6 6 5 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 0 Total Loss Due Loss Due Loss Due Total Run Total Km. % of loss Loss Due Schd. To S.O. % % To % To Bus % Extra kms Kms. Loss Km. To Traffic Kms. staff Accidents Defect 24th 632885 628174 5423 0.86% 1578.4 29.11% 1014.7 18.71% 315.9 5.83% 2513.8 46.36% 636.9Month 25thMonth * Op. Cit, JANMARG, CEPT University
  17. 17. Speed Analysis*on Route based on ITS Real Time information dated 9th Nov. 2011 Route Line Speed (KMPH) RTO- 1 23.47 Maninagar Anjali - 2 25.60 Naroda RTO-Naroda 3 24.08 RTO - SLP 4 22.56 Janmarg System Average Speed for all the routes are 23.58 Km/Hour* Op. Cit, JANMARG, CEPT University
  18. 18. Bus Docking Survey (Morning)* Samples: 4 per bus100.00%90.00%80.00%70.00%60.00%50.00%40.00%30.00%20.00%10.00% 0.00% 6912 1242 5823 8172 9172 9466 9302 8001 9072 4365 9109 4302 Perfect Almost Perfect Slighty far Far* Op. Cit, JANMARG, CEPT University
  19. 19. Sex and Occupation Distribution of BRTS Users* Sex Distribution Occupation Distribution Sample Size: 472 3% Sevice 7% Business/Professional 28% 36% Casual Worker Male Female Student 64% 42% 7% Housewife 13% RetiedAverage Household Monthly income Private Vehicle Ownership 3% (in Rs.) 9% 14% Less than 7,500 41% 7500- 20,000 48% 20,000-40,000 40,000- 80,000 Greater than 80,000 39% 35% N/A 11% 2-Wheeler 4-Wheeler N/A * Op. Cit, JANMARG, CEPT University
  20. 20. JANMARG User Feedback Survey (Opinion of BRTS Users)* 24th Month Staff in Uniform Ticket payment easy Stops clean Prices fair Service is reliable and comfortable Behaviour of staff is good and helpfulBehaviour of driver is good and helpful Driven safely Clean buses Good frequency Safe to cross road 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Yes No 25th Month Staff in Uniform Ticket payment easy Stops clean Prices fair Service is reliable and comfortable Behaviour of staff is good and helpfulBehaviour of driver is good and helpful Driven safely Clean buses Good frequency Safe to cross road 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% * Op. Cit, JANMARG, CEPT University
  21. 21. Lessons Learned• Public transport is, in effect, a business; – Cannot run well without information on; • product quality, efficiency of business processes • customer number/characteristics/satisfaction• Monitoring of particular importance for BRT: – Integrated high quality system sensitive to performance of a number of elements – Usually operated/maintained by several separate entities with a single independent system integrator/manager• Most important use of information is internal city specific benchmarking• Credibility and customer good will are enhanced by transparency and openness

×