Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

CONNECTKaro 2015 - Session 2 - Smart City Smart Mobility

1,104 views

Published on

Speaker - Prof. Shivanand Swamy, Associate Director, CEPT University

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Be the first to comment

CONNECTKaro 2015 - Session 2 - Smart City Smart Mobility

  1. 1. SMART MOBILITY APRIL 2015 By Prof. Shivanand Swamy Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport; CEPT University, Ahmedabad SMART CITY
  2. 2. INDIAN CITIES ARE GROWING CITIES THEY ARE DESIGNED FOR COMMUNITY LIVING AND COLLECTIVE MOBILITY
  3. 3. CITY COMPARIOSIONS Aspect India Europe USA Population Density 120 50 10-15 Percapita Motrised Trip Rates 0.75-1.1 2-3 2-3 Cars/1000 population 100 400 600-800' Vehicles/1000 population 225 450 800-900' Road length per capita (m) 0.75-1.25 2-3 5-7 Road length per ha (m) 100-120 115 90 % NMT Work Trips 20-25 15-20 5 NMT % of total passenger km 48 23 3 Car use-percapita(‘000km/yr) 1400 4500 12000 ICT Use Low High High C
  4. 4. -Doubling of population in next 30-40 years - Trip rates to double with increased work participation (women coming into workforce) - Vehicle Ownership Rates Increasing - How do we ensure mobility security?
  5. 5. - ALLOCATING ROAD SPACE FOR COLLECTIVE MOBILITY IS THE WAY FORWARD - BRTS IS A KEY ELEMENT IN SMART MOBILITY
  6. 6. 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 0 5 10 15 20 25 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 CumulativeNumberof Cities NewCities 2009: Ahmedabad (Janmarg), India 2000: Bogotá (TransMilenio), Colombia 1974/1991*: Curitiba 1972/2010*: Lima http://brtdata.org, October 2013 Growth of BRTS Worldover
  7. 7. 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 BRTSNetworkLength(inkms) Time Series Latin America North America Europe China India Growth of BRTS Worldover
  8. 8. MYTHS ABOUT BRTS BRTS • Takes away road space! • Roads will be congested! • Very few buses given priority over large mixed traffic vehicles! • Movement will be inefficient! • Too much Investment – Too little a benefit Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and Surat Municipal Corporation : Government of Gujarat Technical Assistance: Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. (An initiative of the Ministry of Urban Development,
  9. 9. CURRENT SCENARIO
  10. 10. By: Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. People moved : 150 Area occupied – 84 sq. m Queue length – 24 m. Janmarg Mixed traffic MORE BUSES MEAN LESS TRAFFIC Existing Scenario (Ahmedabad) November 2012 People moved :77 Area occupied – 486 sq. m. Queue length - 54 m. Phase Time – 40 Seconds Cycle Length – 120 Seconds
  11. 11. By: Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. People moved – 150 Area occupied – 84 sq. m Queue length – 24 m. Janmarg Mixed traffic MORE CARS – Constant queue Length- Reduction in people moved MORE CARS MEANS LESS PEOPLE People moved -45 (Reduction from 77) Area occupied – 486 sq. m. Queue length - 54 m.
  12. 12. By: Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. People moved – 150 Area occupied – 84 sq. m Queue length – 24 m. People moved -77 Queue length - 183 m. (Increase from 54 meters) Phase time – 70 Seconds Cycle Length – 180 Seconds Janmarg Mixed traffic MORE CARS – Same No of people – Longer Queue MORE CARS MEANS LONGER QUES
  13. 13. Future Scenario: If the Traffic is Doubled Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and Surat Municipal Corporation : Government of Gujarat Technical Assistance: Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. (An initiative of the Ministry of Urban Development,
  14. 14. By: Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. People moved – 280 Area occupied – 135 sq. m Queue length – 37 m. People moved -155 Queue length – 210 m. Phase time – 70 Seconds Cycle Length – 180 Seconds Janmarg Mixed traffic MORE CARS – Same No of people – Longer Queue MORE CARS MEANS LONGER QUES Janmarg – Focus on Moving People.. 18 M ARTICULATED BUS CAPACITY- 140
  15. 15. IF BRTS DID NOT EXIST
  16. 16. By: Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. People moved -240 Queue length - 165 m. (Increase from 54 meters) Phase time – 100 Seconds Cycle Length > 180 Seconds (Not Desirable) Mixed traffic Present scenario- without BRTS MORE CARS MEANS LONGER QUES
  17. 17. By: Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. People moved -240 Queue length - 463 m. (Increase from 210 meters) Phase Time – 200 Seconds+ (Not possible to operate with At-grade junction) Mixed traffic Future Scenario- (double traffic) without BRTS MORE CARS MEANS LONGER QUES
  18. 18. RESULTRESULT with NO BRTS Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and Surat Municipal Corporation : Government of Gujarat Technical Assistance: Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. (An initiative of the Ministry of Urban Development,
  19. 19. Without BRTS all modes are SLOW With BRTS even the cars move faster!! Who is Moving?
  20. 20. Origin - Destination Length With BRT Without BRT Saving Average Delay (s) Savings (sec) Average Delay (sec) Average Delays w/o BRT over with BRT From To (Km) BRT Mix Traffic Helmet Keshavbaug 2.1 104 339 235 395 3.8 times Helmet Shivaranajani 2.6 138 368 230 431 3.1 times SIMULATION RESULTS FROM VISSIM -- FROM HELMET TO SHIVARAJANI INTERSECTION • The evaluation results indicate the average speed of 27.2 and 22-24 kmph for BRT and mixed traffic respectively. • The evaluation results indicate the average speed under mixed traffic situation is 16-19 KMPHAhmedabad Municipal Corporation and Surat Municipal Corporation : Government of Gujarat Technical Assistance: Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. (An initiative of the Ministry of Urban Development, SPEED DELAY ANALYSIS
  21. 21. BRTS – A SMART WAY TO MOBILITY 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000 1802 1980 2158 2336 2514 2692 2870 3048 3226 3404 3582 3760 3938 4116 4294 4472 4650 4828 5006 5184 5362 5540 5718 5896 6074 DistanceTravelled Distance Travelled 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000 1802 1920 2038 2156 2274 2392 2510 2628 2746 2864 2982 3100 3218 3336 3454 3572 3690 3808 3926 4044 4162 4280 4398 4516 4634 4752 Distance Travelled Sample size: 10 Buses Bunching of buses in no BRT scenario leads to higher journey time. Sample size: 12 Buses Segregated bus lanes reduce bunching by increasing reliability BRTS adds system reliability No BRT Scenario BRT scenario Average Journey Time: 38 mins & 31 minsAverage Journey Time: 60 mins
  22. 22. LESSON: BUILD BRTS - Full BRTS -Light BRTS -Elevated BRTS Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and Surat Municipal Corporation : Government of Gujarat Technical Assistance: Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. (An initiative of the Ministry of Urban Development,
  23. 23. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and Surat Municipal Corporation : Government of Gujarat Technical Assistance: Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. (An initiative of the Ministry of Urban Development, Bogota BRT System – FULL BRTS Route Length operational 84km BRTS Stations 114 Daily Ridership 1,650,000 Bus Capacity 140 /210 System Capacity 45,000 pphpd currently System Speed (avg.) 28.0 kmph Curitiba BRT System – FULL BRTS Route Length operational 81 km BRTS Stations 113 Daily Ridership 504,500 Bus Capacity 80/140/210 System Capacity 13,000 pphpd currently System Speed (avg.) 19 kmph Case Studies
  24. 24. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and Surat Municipal Corporation : Government of Gujarat Technical Assistance: Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. (An initiative of the Ministry of Urban Development, Xiamen BRTS – Elevated Corridor – FULL BRTS Route Length operational 67.5km BRTS Stations 47 Daily Ridership - Bus Capacity 80 System Capacity 8,360 pphpd currently System Speed (avg.) 27.0 kmph Istanbul BRT System – FULL BRTS Route Length operational 42km BRTS Stations 33 Daily Ridership 600,000 Bus Capacity 170 System Capacity 30,000 pphpd currently System Speed 42kmph (avg.) Case Studies
  25. 25. ELEVATED BRTS Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Amdavad PRO(s): • Can respond to RoW constraints upto 24 m • Minimize R&R impacts • Reduce delays CON(s): • Higher capital cost • Longer construction time • Traffic management during implementation
  26. 26. BRTS BHUBANESWAR Junction Treatment for BRTS LITE Segregation at BRTS LITE Station
  27. 27. Parking Mess Eg from Ahmedabad On-Street Parking reduces Road Infrastructure Capacity Traffic Speed PARKING MANAGEMENT !!! Planned On site situation Element Width % covered Width % covered Footpath 2.25m 15 % 2.25m 15 % Carriageway 9.25m 50% 7m 22% BRT lane 3.65m 25 % 3.65m 25 % BRT Stop 1.9m 1.9m Parking 2.25 8 % 6m 36%
  28. 28. DO WE HAVE AN OPTION ?
  29. 29. BRTS SURAT 2006 NO PUBLIC TRANSPORT
  30. 30. BRTS SURAT 2009 SOME PUBLIC TRANSPORT
  31. 31. BRTS SURAT 2014 BRTS as PUBLIC TRANSPORT
  32. 32. INTEGRATED LAND USE WITH MASS TRANSIT 2021
  33. 33. Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad Focus on moving people
  34. 34. Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad BRTS Breaks Social Barrier
  35. 35. THANK YOU

×