DOCSLIB.ORG

Characteristics of Metro Networks and Methodology for Their Evaluation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Characteristics of Metro Networks and Methodology for Their Evaluation 22 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD 1162 Characteristics of Metro Networks and Methodology for Their Evaluation ANTONIO Musso AND VuKAN R. VucH1c PURPOSE, ORGANIZATION, AND SCOPE Presented In this paper are the results of research on metro (rapid transit) networks, focusing on their geometric charac­ teristics. The object Is to define the most important measures, Presented in this paper is a systematic set of quantitative Indicators, and characteristics of geometric forms that can elements that defines the network characteristics of metro sys­ Improve the present predominantly empirical methods used in tems that can be used for their description, evaluation, and metro network planning and analysis. Several measures of comparative analysis. Examples of such evaluations include metro network size and rorm, including length, number or planning of new or analysis of existing networks, their com­ lines, and stations, which express the extensiveness of the sys­ parison with networks of other cities, and comparison of alter­ tem, are selected; they are also needed for derivations of various indicators. A number of selected indicators are then native network extensions. presented. These represent the most effective tool for network The quantitative elements are grouped into five general cate­ comparison because most of them are Independent of network gories, as follows: size. Several Indicators relating metro network to the city size and population express the degree of adequacy of the network 1. Measures of network size and form, to meet the city's needs. Based on experiences from a number of metro systems, characteristics of different types of lines 2. Indicators of network topology, (radial, diametrical, circumferential, and other) are defined. 3. Measures of relationship between network and city, These allow evaluation of network types, such as radial-cir­ 4. Quantity and quality of offered service, and cumferential versus grid networks. An analysis of metro net­ 5. Measures of service use. works in 10 different cities is presented to Illustrate the ap­ plications of theoretical and empirical materials; several basic measures and indicators of these networks have been com­ The sections covering these five categories are follo\ved by a puted and analyzed. The scope of quantitative elements, analy­ description of the basic forms of metro lines and their charac­ ses of types of lines, and descriptions of networks are limited teristics. Finally, an application of these measures to metro because of space constraints, but they illustrate the methodol­ networks in 10 cities is given using many of the elements ogy that can be used, In a more comprehensive way, for a defined previously. number of different analyses of metro networks, their designs, Many different aspects of metro networks can be analyzed; or their extensions. the emphasis here is on the geometric form and the method of operation of transit lines and networks; that is, on categories The planning of metro (rapid transit) networks is usually pre­ 1-3 listed. Categories 4 and 5 are given only as a guideline for dominantly empirical. Consideration of local conditions, such analysis focusing on service quality and efficiency of as demand characteristics, existence of transportation corridors, operations. requirements for certain station locations, and so on, tend to In this paper, theoretical concepts are selectively used, par­ suppress the analyses of network topology and geometric ticularly from graph theory (J), focusing on those with practi­ characteristics. However, even though designers of metro lines cal relevance to actual metro network planning. The paper is and networks may want to use some design guidelines, to also based on experiences from many cities on metro network perform comparative analyses or to make use of experiences design, service, and operating characteristics. from network operations in other cities, very few of these can be found in the professional literature. As already mentioned, the data needed for network planning Because of the high cost of metro construction and the and analysis vary with the purpose of the analysis and local permanence of its facilities, it is important to design optimal conditions in the city studied. The data used for the indicators networks with respect to service for passengers, efficiency of and analyses presented in this paper are listed in Table 1. operation, and relationship of the metro system to the city. This is a complex task and it deserves more attention than it has MEASURES AND INDICATORS OF received until now. An attempt is made in this study to provide METRO NETWORKS materials that may assist in the planning and design of metro system networks, lines, and stations. Network Size and Form A. Musso, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Salemo, Salemo, Italy. Current address: 15, Via Domenico Cirillo, 00197 The main elements that express the size and form of a metro Rome, Italy. V. R. Vuchic, University of Pennsyivania, Department of network arc defined as follows. Corresponding terms from Systems, 113 Towne Building, Philadelphia, Pa. 19104-6315. graph theory are given in parentheses. Musso and Vuchic 23 TABLE 1 BASIC INFORMATION NEEDED FOR METRO LINE NIJM8ER NETWORK ANALYSIS I @ MULTIPLE STATIONS Number Item Symbol Dimension J 2 2 2 1 Population of the served area p Persons 2 2 Surface of the served area Su km ® I 2 2 MLt.TIPLE SFflCINO{k,2) J SPACING LENGTH 3 Vehicle-km operated per day w veh-km (km) 4 Vehicle or car capacity Cv Spaces/veh 5 Vehicles per train [transit unit a ILLUSTRATION OF NETWORK ELEMENTS (TU)] nru vehffU 6 Operating speed Vo km/h ® ..-- -CD 7 Frequency of service f TU/h 8 Number of metro passengers per day Pad Persons/day 9 Number of metro passengers per year ~ay Persons/year 10 Average trip length Ip km 11 Number of total transit passengers per day P, Persons/day b ELEMENTS FOR COMPUTATION OF 00 VALUES 12 Number of stations on the FIGURE 1 Network schematics. network N Stations 13 Number of stations with park-and-ride NP Stations a-7 Number of station spacings in a network, A, is computed 14 Schematic map of network as the sum of spacings on individual lines minus the multiple with stations spacings, as explained under a-4: 15 Number of lines and their lengths n1, Ii -,km n1 kmu A = I. ai - I. k x a~ (3) i=l k=2 a-1 Number of stations (nodes) on a line i, ni. This number can also be computed via N: a-2 Number of interstation spacings (arcs) on a line i, ai, is related to n as follows: A= N- 1 + C, (4) (1) where C, is the number of closed circles in the network. In the a-3 Length of line i, li. case illustrated in Figure la, the number of spacings (including a-4 Number of multiple stations (jointly used by two or more single and multiple) computed by line is lines), n~. and lengths of double sections, t!. in which k designates the number of lines using a station or a spacing. These superscripts must be introduced to avoid double count­ A = 7 + 8 + 3 - (1 x 3 + 2 x 1) = 13 spacings ing in computations of the number of stations, spacings, and origin-destination (OD) pairs. For these computations the num­ Alternatively, using the number of stations (Equation 4), the ber of stations, n~, must be computed as 1 less than the number number of spacings is of lines it serves (i.e., as k - 1, while the number of multiple spacings, a~. and their lengths, l~. are used as given). This will A = 13 - 1 + 1 = 13 spacings be illustrated on cases following a-6, a-7, and a-8. a-5 Number of lines in a network, n • 1 a-8 Length of network, L, is the sum of line lengths minus a-6 Number of stations in a network, N, is computed as the the multiple spacings: sum of stations on individual lines minus the multiple stations as follows: n1 kmax ni kmu L = I. Ii - I. (k - 1) x l~ (5) i=l k=2 N = I. ni - I. (k - 1) x n~ (2) i=l k=2 Using the example from Figure la: For example, the network in Figure la consists of three lines with 8, 9, and 4 stations, respectively: L = 12 + 14 + 5 - (1 x 1 + 2 x 2 + 1 x 1 + 1 x 2) = 23 km 2 3 nm = 4 and nm = 2 a-9 Number of circles in a network, c,.. The number of thus, the total number of stations (single and multiple) in the circles in a network can be computed by Equation 4 as: network is N = 8 + 9 + 4 - (1 x 4 + 2 x 2) = 13 stations C, =A - N + 1 (6) 24 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD ll62 The range of Cr values is 0 < Cr < 2N - 5. N = 6 + 7 + 8 - (4 x 1 + 1 x 2) = 15 stations a-10 Number of station-to-station travel paths, OD, consists OD = 1/z x 15 (15 - 1) = 105 paths of direct paths, ODd, and paths that include one or more transfers, OD1• In a network with N stations, the number of all The computation of ODd now becomes more complex. The possible OD paths is first sum in Equation 9 is: OD = N (N - 1)/2 (7) ,., (1/2) L. ni(ni - 1) =( 1/z) x (6 x 5 + 7 x 6 + 4 x 3) For a line with i stations, the number of OD paths is i=l = 42 paths (8) the last member (4 x 3) representing the branch section e-h. and all of them are direct. The total number of direct paths in a The second sum from Equation 9 must include the additional network is equal to the sum of OD paths along each line and paths between stations: a-band d-e (2 x 2), a-d aml/-h (4 x along each single branch plus the paths on overlapping lines 3); thus, (i.e., those serving jointly sections of different lines): "d ODd = 1/2 L, ni (ni - 1) + L nm} x nbj (9) L, nm} X nbj = 2 x 2 + 4 x 3 = 16 paths i·l j=l j=l where ODd = 42 + 16 = 58 paths nm = the number of joint stations that the "double" line shares with the already counted "basic" OD,= OD - ODd = 105 - 58 = 47 paths line, nb = the numher of stations on the branches The .lQ elements expressing size and form of metro network are (single sections) of that line, and listed in Table 2.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Your Paper's Title Starts Here
    Dual Rated Speeds Escalator in Rapid Transit System with Extended Ramping Up and Down KC Gan, LF Cai, SC Cheah, Hadi Wijaya, Melvyn Thong Land Transport Authority, Singapore Keywords: Dual rated speeds, automatic switching, rapid transit system, acceleration, ramping up, ramping down, vibration, jerkiness. Abstract. To cater for different needs of escalator operating speeds in rapid transit systems (i.e. higher rated speed of 0.75m/s during peak hours is for effective discharging of passengers while slower rated speed of 0.50m/s during off-peak hours is for elderly passengers), we have introduced the dual rated speed escalator. Conventionally, the switching between 2 rated speeds can be done either manually through a key switch or automatically when no passengers are detected on the escalators at pre-set timing. However, there is a possibility of not being able to change speed if there are constant passengers coming into the rapid transit station, taking the escalators. Therefore, this shortcoming will be overcome by setting up a schedule timetable to do the safe switching of escalator rated speeds with passengers riding on the escalators with extended ramping up and down without comprising any safety requirements. This paper presents the case studies conducted on an existing station where a performance–based approach was adopted. The timing for the speed ramping up/down between the 2 rated speeds has been increased to 30 seconds in order to reduce the acceleration which results in minimizing the acceleration (vibration) and the rate of change of this acceleration (jerk). The objective is to ensure that the passenger’s perception are imperceptible and do not experience any abnormal and sudden change of vibration and jerk during the switching of dual rated speeds with extended ramping up and down.
    [Show full text]
  • Naylor Road Metro Station Area Accessibility Study
    Naylor Road Metro Station Area Accessibility Study Pedestrian and Bicycle Metro Station Access Transportation Land-Use Connection (TLC) National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission May 2011 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Study Overview ............................................................................................................................................. 4 Study Process ............................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Background .................................................................................................................................................................................. 6 Planning Context and Past Studies ............................................................................................................................................... 7 Existing Conditions and Challenges ............................................................................................................. 10 Public Outreach .........................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Pentagon City Metro Station Second Elevator Transportation Commission
    Pentagon City Metro Station Second Elevator Transportation Commission July 01, 2021 Pentagon City Metro Station Second Elevator • BACKGROUND: The Pentagon City Metrorail station is one of the highest in terms of ridership among stations in Northern Virginia,. • Provides access to multiple retail, government, and commercial office buildings, and is a transfer point for regional and local transit buses and numerous private bus services. • Construction of a new second elevator Intersection of S Hayes and S 12th Streets on the north side of the passageway corresponds to the new second New Elevator Existing elevator being in the general area of Elevator the pedestrian path for people crossing S. Hayes Street. July 01, 2021 Pentagon City Metro Station Second Elevator Project Scope: • The second elevator will eliminate the need to cross six (6) lanes of traffic, two parking lanes, and a bike lane to reach the elevator on the east side of S. Hayes Street. • Improves ADA access and access for passengers with strollers and luggage. • Provide redundancy, in accordance with current WMATA design criteria, when one of the elevators is out of service for any reason. July 01, 2021 Pentagon City Metro Station Second Elevator Construction Phase: On January 25, 2021, Arlington County received two (2) bids • The low bidder, W.M. Schlosser Company, Inc. was awarded the contract on April 19, 2021 for $6.4 mil. • The County and Procon (CM), will work together with the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) to ensure construction is performed
    [Show full text]
  • NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon
    Portland State University PDXScholar Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Nohad A. Toulan School of Urban Studies and Publications and Presentations Planning 6-24-2014 Do TODs Make a Difference? NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon Jenny H. Liu Portland State University, [email protected] Zakari Mumuni Portland State University Matt Berggren Portland State University Matt Miller University of Utah Arthur C. Nelson University of Utah SeeFollow next this page and for additional additional works authors at: https:/ /pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac Part of the Transportation Commons, Urban Studies Commons, and the Urban Studies and Planning Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details Liu, Jenny H.; Mumuni, Zakari; Berggren, Matt; Miller, Matt; Nelson, Arthur C.; and Ewing, Reid, "Do TODs Make a Difference? NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon" (2014). Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Publications and Presentations. 124. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac/124 This Report is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Authors Jenny H. Liu, Zakari Mumuni, Matt Berggren, Matt Miller, Arthur C. Nelson, and Reid Ewing This report is available at PDXScholar: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac/124 NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon Do TODs Make a Difference? Jenny H. Liu, Zakari Mumuni, Matt Berggren, Matt Miller, Arthur C. Nelson & Reid Ewing Portland State University 6/24/2014 ______________________________________________________________________________ DO TODs MAKE A DIFFERENCE? 1 of 35 Section 1-INTRODUCTION 2 of 35 ______________________________________________________________________________ Table of Contents 1-INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison Between Bus Rapid Transit and Light-Rail Transit Systems: a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Approach
    Urban Transport XXIII 143 COMPARISON BETWEEN BUS RAPID TRANSIT AND LIGHT-RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEMS: A MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS APPROACH MARÍA EUGENIA LÓPEZ LAMBAS1, NADIA GIUFFRIDA2, MATTEO IGNACCOLO2 & GIUSEPPE INTURRI2 1TRANSyT, Transport Research Centre, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Spain 2Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture (DICAR), University of Catania, Italy ABSTRACT The construction choice between two different transport systems in urban areas, as in the case of Light-Rail Transit (LRT) and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) solutions, is often performed on the basis of cost-benefit analysis and geometrical constraints due to the available space for the infrastructure. Classical economic analysis techniques are often unable to take into account some of the non-monetary parameters which have a huge impact on the final result of the choice, since they often include social acceptance and sustainability aspects. The application of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) techniques can aid decision makers in the selection process, with the possibility to compare non-homogeneous criteria, both qualitative and quantitative, and allowing the generation of an objective ranking of the different alternatives. The coupling of MCDA and Geographic Information System (GIS) environments also permits an easier and faster analysis of spatial parameters, and a clearer representation of indicator comparisons. Based on these assumptions, a LRT and BRT system will be analysed according to their own transportation, economic, social and environmental impacts as a hypothetical exercise; moreover, through the use of MCDA techniques a global score for both systems will be determined, in order to allow for a fully comprehensive comparison. Keywords: BHLS, urban transport, transit systems, TOPSIS.
    [Show full text]
  • Eastwick Intermodal Center
    Eastwick Intermodal Center January 2020 New vo,k City • p-~ d DELAWARE VALLEY DVRPC's vision for the Greater Ph iladelphia Region ~ is a prosperous, innovative, equitable, resilient, and fJ REGl!rpc sustainable region that increases mobility choices PLANNING COMMISSION by investing in a safe and modern transportation system; Ni that protects and preserves our nat ural resources w hile creating healthy communities; and that fosters greater opportunities for all. DVRPC's mission is to achieve this vision by convening the widest array of partners to inform and facilitate data-driven decision-making. We are engaged across the region, and strive to be lea ders and innovators, exploring new ideas and creating best practices. TITLE VI COMPLIANCE / DVRPC fully complies with Title VJ of the Civil Rights Act of 7964, the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 7987, Executive Order 72898 on Environmental Justice, and related nondiscrimination mandates in all programs and activities. DVRPC's website, www.dvrpc.org, may be translated into multiple languages. Publications and other public documents can usually be made available in alternative languages and formats, if requested. DVRPC's public meetings are always held in ADA-accessible facilities, and held in transit-accessible locations whenever possible. Translation, interpretation, or other auxiliary services can be provided to individuals who submit a request at least seven days prior to a public meeting. Translation and interpretation services for DVRPC's projects, products, and planning processes are available, generally free of charge, by calling (275) 592-7800. All requests will be accommodated to the greatest extent possible. Any person who believes they have been aggrieved by an unlawful discriminatory practice by DVRPC under Title VI has a right to file a formal complaint.
    [Show full text]
  • Walking Toward Metro Stations: the Contribution of Distance, Attitudes, and Perceived Built Environment
    sustainability Article Walking toward Metro Stations: the Contribution of Distance, Attitudes, and Perceived Built Environment Mohammad Paydar 1,* , Asal Kamani Fard 2 and Mohammad Mehdi Khaghani 3 1 Escuela de Arquitectura Temuco, Facultad de Humanidades, Universidad Mayor, Av. Alemania 281, Temuco 4780000, Chile 2 Academic Researcher, Universidad Católica del Maule, San Miguel 3605, Talca, Chile; [email protected] 3 Department of Urban Studies, Apadana Institute of Higher Education, Shiraz 7187985443, Iran; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 17 September 2020; Accepted: 16 November 2020; Published: 9 December 2020 Abstract: Walking as an active means of travel is important as a sustainable mode of transport. Moreover, the level of walking in the surrounding areas of metro stations would contribute to maintaining the minimum rate of physical activity and, therefore, inhabitants’ general health. This study examined the impacts of walking attitude, walking distance, and perceived built environment on walking behavior for reaching the metro stations in Shiraz, Iran. Three metro stations were selected and a quantitative approach was used to examine the objectives. It was found that the average walking distance is less than the average in developed countries, such as the United States. People walked more when there was a shorter distance between their starting points and the metro stations. The contribution of walking attitudes and several built environment attributes to walking behavior was demonstrated. Finding the contribution of aesthetic attributes, such as accessibility to parks and housing types of the starting points of the walking trips, to walking for transport are taken into account as the novelties of this study.
    [Show full text]
  • Birmingham Interchange Station a High Speed Transport Hub
    BIRMINGHAM INTERCHANGE STATION A HIGH SPEED TRANSPORT HUB Phase 2 of High Speed Two (HS2) will create a ‘Y network’ from Birmingham to Manchester and Leeds, as part of strengthening connections between the South East and the Northern Powerhouse. To avoid a lengthy diversion via central Birmingham and reduce congestion with intercity freight, a new interchange station will be built nine miles east of the city near Solihull, allowing services to diverge and connect to the North West and the North East. In line with the Government’s plans to level up the economy across Britain, Birmingham Interchange Station will improve connectivity for local residents and provide a catalyst for investment not only in the West Midlands but nationwide. April 2021 A452 WHAT IS BIRMINGHAM INTERCHANGE STATION? Birmingham Interchange Station is a critical part of the HS2 network, which will bring the West Midlands within an hour’s commute of London, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield, York, Preston, and Wigan. It consists of three projects across a 370-acre site: a new rail gateway for the • Interchange Station: NATIONAL region that will serve up to 38,000 passengers per EXHIBITION CENTRE day, along two 415-metre platforms BIRMINGHAM AIRPORT • Automated People Mover: a new short-distance BIRMINGHAM transit system allowing up to 2,100 passengers per BIRMINGHAM INTERCHANGE AIRPORT BIRMINGHAM STATION hour to travel between the NEC, Birmingham Airport STOP INTERNATIONAL RAILWAY STATION and other local transport hubs NEC STOP HS2 • Local Road Improvements: improvements to the local road network, with four new highway bridges BIRMINGHAM MAINTENANCE INTERNATIONAL AUTOMATED FACILITY strengthening connections between existing routes.
    [Show full text]
  • Improving Rail Station Access in Australia
    Improving Rail Station Access in Australia CRC for Rail Innovation [insert date] Page i Improving Rail Station Access in Australia DOCUMENT CONTROL SHEET Document: CRC for Rail Innovation Old Central Station, 290 Ann St. Title: Improving Rail Station Access in Australia Brisbane Qld 4000 Project Leader: Phil Charles GPO Box 1422 Brisbane Qld 4001 Authors: Ronald Galiza and Phil Charles Tel: +61 7 3221 2536 Project No.: R1.133 Fax: +61 7 3235 2987 Project Name: Station Access www.railcrc.net.au Synopsis: This document on improving rail station access in Australia is the main document for the CRC project on Station Access. The document reviews Australian and international planning guides to identify key elements important in planning for station access. Best practice elements were identified for inclusion in an access planning methodology for the Australian context. An evaluation framework featuring a checklist of station access principles associated with each access mode is provided to assess existing station access. Case studies are presented from Brisbane, Perth, and Sydney so as to illustrate the framework. This document presents a new perspective for Australian rail agencies, including access in the overall design process and provides a best practice approach, building on available station access-related planning in Australia and developments in Europe and North America. REVISION/CHECKING HISTORY REVISION DATE ACADEMIC REVIEW INDUSTRY REVIEW APPROVAL NUMBER (PROGRAM LEADER) (PROJECT CHAIR) (RESEARCH DIRECTOR) 0 23 September 2013 DISTRIBUTION REVISION DESTINATION 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Industry x Participant for Review Established and supported under the Australian Government’s cooperative Research Centres Programme Copyright © 2013 This work is copyright.
    [Show full text]
  • Melbourne Metro Rail Project – South Yarra Metro Station Customer Outcomes and Economic Assessment Report June 2015
    Melbourne Metro Rail Project – South Yarra Metro Station Customer Outcomes and Economic Assessment Report June 2015 Trim Ref: [DOC/15/216339] Page 19 of 335 Executive Summary Background The Melbourne Metro Rail Project core project involves constructing a new tunnel from South Yarra to South Kensington, and includes new stations at Arden, Parkville, CBD North, CBD South and Domain. This report outlines the customer outcomes and economics assessment of an option to include an additional stop at new station platforms on the Melbourne Metro alignment at South Yarra (“South Yarra Interchange Station”). Forecasts of customer demand were undertaken for both scenarios using the Victorian Integrated Transport Model (VITM). This model forecasts trips across all modes, including trains, trams, buses and private car. Forecasts have been prepared for 2031 and 2046, and the modelled station design reflected easy interchange for customers (which provides for optimistic outcomes compared to potential outcomes if a lower quality interchange is ultimately delivered). South Yarra is currently the 11th busiest station on the metropolitan rail network, serving a catchment comprising a mix of employment, retail and residential uses. South Yarra has been experiencing strong growth in the Chapel Street and Forrest Hill precincts in recent years. This growth is expected to continue, but is located closer to the existing station than the potential new platforms. Other areas in the station’s walkable catchment are zoned Neighbourhood or General Residential and
    [Show full text]
  • PLANNING GUIDE for Public Transportation Elevators Table of Contents
    PLANNING GUIDE FOR Public transportation elevators Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...........................................................................................................4 1.1 About this Planning Guide ............................................................................................4 1.2 About KONE .................................................................................................................4 2. Special demands of public transportation ........................................................... 7 2.1 Airports ........................................................................................................................7 2.1.1 Benefits of KONE elevators for airports ...................................................................................... 7 2.2 Transit centers (railway and metro ststions) ...................................................................8 2.2.1 Benefits of KONE elevators in railway and metro stations .......................................................... 8 2.3 Main specifications for public transportation elevators ...............................................10 2.4 Electromagnetic compatibility standards ....................................................................11 2.5 LSH and LH cables ......................................................................................................11 3. Odering a public transportation elevator ...........................................................12 3.1 Key cost drivers for elevators in
    [Show full text]
  • Tfl Interchange Signs Standard
    Transport for London Interchange signs standard Issue 5 MAYOR OF LONDON Transport for London 1 Interchange signs standard Contents 1 Introduction 3 Directional signs and wayfinding principles 1.1 Types of interchange sign 3.1 Directional signing at Interchanges 1.2 Core network symbols 3.2 Directional signing to networks 1.3 Totem signs 3.3 Incorporating service information 1.3 Horizontal format 3.4 Wayfinding sequence 1.4 Network identification within interchanges 3.5 Accessible routes 1.5 Pictograms 3.6 Line diagrams – Priciples 3.7 Line diagrams – Line representation 3.8 Line diagrams – Symbology 3.9 Platform finders Specific networks : 2 3.10 Platform confirmation signs National Rail 2.1 3.11 Platform station names London Underground 2.2 3.12 Way out signs Docklands Light Railway 2.3 3.13 Multiple exits London Overground 2.4 3.14 Linking with Legible London London Buses 2.5 3.15 Exit guides 2.6 London Tramlink 3.16 Exit guides – Decision points 2.7 London Coach Stations 3.17 Exit guides on other networks 2.8 London River Services 3.18 Signing to bus services 2.9 Taxis 3.19 Signing to bus services – Route changes 2.10 Cycles 3.20 Viewing distances 3.21 Maintaining clear sightlines 4 References and contacts Interchange signing standard Issue 5 1 Introduction Contents Good signing and information ensure our customers can understand Londons extensive public transport system and can make journeys without undue difficulty and frustruation. At interchanges there may be several networks, operators and line identities which if displayed together without consideration may cause confusion for customers.
    [Show full text]