Level of Service for Buses

8/2/2019 Level of Service for Buses

1/30

4/28/12

Click to edit Master subtitlestyle

Level Of

Service forBusesByShalini Kanuganti


2/30

4/28/12

Introduction

Advantages of Buses

(i) it decreases the need for personal

vehicles and thus relieves vehiculartraffic congestion.

(ii) it increases roadway capacity(persons/h).

(iii) it provides an affordable, and for manypeople, necessary alternative topersonalized modes, and

(iv) it avoids driving stress and can be


3/30

4/28/12

Need of LOS

In developed countries, where the demand for transitis low, the service authorities try to attract passengersattention by providing maximum possible LOS.

In developing countries like India, the demand fortransportation is very high in comparison to thesupply. Operators do not care to provide reasonableLOS to the transit passengers

In the absence of an adequate and efficient bustransit system, the potential bus users shift topersonal vehicles.


4/30

4/28/12

Objectives of present study are

To identify the service characteristics consideredimportant by the city dwellers to determine thelevel of service provided by public bus system.

To determine the weights put on the identified

service characteristics by the regular users of bussystem.

Evaluation of level of service provided by publicbus service in three different routes within the

central area of the city. Development of level of service model for buses

using maximum likelihood estimation theory.


5/30

4/28/12

Selection of site

Three routes were selected randomly in Jaipur citycenter

Route 1

Route 2

Route 3


6/30

4/28/12

Selection of Attributes

It is required to identify the service attributes whichare considered important by the commuters so asto suggest improvement measures to providehigher LOS as compared to the existing situation

The attribute characteristics have been categorisedinto three categories namely

Quantity

Quality

Cost/revenue of the service


7/30

4/28/12

Servicecharacteristics(Attributes)

1. Travel Cost (Rs.) [TC]2. Total journey time (min) [TJ]

3. Walking distance both at the

origin (home to bus stop anddestination stop to destination)(Km) [WD]

4. Waiting time at bus stop (min)[WT ]

5.

Punctuality and Reliability [P&R]


8/30

4/28/12

10. Sufficient number of seats for women[SW ]

11. Ventilation inside bus (i.e. air circulation)[V]

12. Quality of Bus-stop: (Availability of seatsat bus stops, shade from sun & rain,other facilities etc) [QBs ]

13. Safety and security inside bus [ S&Sib ]

14. Bus driver, conductor & co-passengerbehaviour [D,C&Cb ]

15. Route information (Route No. etc.)Written on outside body of the bus [ Ri ]


9/30

4/28/12

Questionnaire

The comfortof riders has been identified as one ofthe top criteria that affect customers satisfactionwith public transportation systems.

It consists of two types of questions

1. Socio-economic backgrounds of the respondents

(age group, income group and sex, etc.)

2. About the rating of the selected service attributes

Very Good (highly satisfactory) = 5

Good = 4

Fair (Standard value) = 3

Satisfactory = 2


10/30

4/28/12

Sex-wise Distribution ofRespondents

SexRespondents from

Route1 Route2 Route3

Female 13 12 13

Male 61 66 44


11/30

4/28/12


12/30

4/28/12

Age Group Distribution

Age Groups in years Respondents from

Route 1 Route 2 Route 3

5-18 13 9 2

18-25 41 38 39

25-45 24 17 13

45-60 12 8 5

>60 2 0 1


13/30

4/28/12


14/30

4/28/12

Income Group Distribution

Income Groupin Rupees

(Income permonth)

Respondents fromRoute1 Route2 Route3

>25000

23 2 21

15001-25000

30 14 13

10001-15000 11 10 12

5001-10000

15 9 9

2501-5000

12 0 4

2500 1 14 0


15/30

4/28/12


16/30

4/28/12

Methodology

Psychometric analysis has been carried out on theresponses given through questionnaire to assign aweightage to each attribute and aspect of quality

Appropriate analysis of improvement of qualitythrough weights of the attributes


17/30

4/28/12

Relative weight of theAttribute

Relative weight of the Attribute=

Average weight scored by the attribute

Sum total of the average scores of all attributes


18/30

4/28/12

Attributes

Attributes

No of persons putting weights on Average valuescore

RelativeWeight value

(Wi)

5 4 3 2 1

Travel Cost(Rs.) 3 3 8 2 2 3.166667 0.044358

Total journeytime (min) 7 7 3 1 0 4.111111 0.057588Walking

distance both atthe origin (Km) 6

4 6 1 1 3.722222 0.05214Waiting time atbus stop (min)

5 5 5 3 0 3.666667 0.051362

Punctuality andReliability

7 7 2 2 0 4.055556 0.056809Availability of

seat

5 3 2 6 2 3.166667 0.044358


19/30

4/28/12

Space available for

standing inside the bus(space is less when thebus is overcrowded )

5 7 6 0 0 3.944444 0.055253Comfort level of the

seats 6 7 3 2 0 3.944444 0.055253Ease of boarding &alighting from bus

(whether low floor ornot)

8 7 1 0 2 4.055556 0.056809

Sufficient number ofseats for women 8 3 2 3 2 3.666667 0.051362

Ventilation inside bus(i.e. air circulation)

7 9 0 2 0 4.166667 0.058366


20/30

4/28/12

Quality of Bus-stop:

(Availability of seats atbus stops, shade fromsun & rain, otherfacilities etc) 4 9 4 1 0 3.888889 0.054475Safety and securityinside bus

10 5 1 1 1 4.222222 0.059144Bus driver, conductor &co-passenger behaviour

7 6 2 2 1 3.888889 0.054475Route information(Route No. etc.)

Written on outside bodyof the bus

9 6 2 0 1 4.222222 0.059144


21/30

4/28/12

Convenience inticket purchasingsystem 8 4 4 2 0 4 0.056031Condition &Cleanliness of Bus

4 9 2 1 2 3.666667 0.051362Noise level (bothfrom vehicle andpassengers) insidethe bus 0 7 3 5 3 2.777778 0.038911Jerking inside therunning bus

3 6 2 3 4 3.055556 0.042802

71.3888

1


22/30

4/28/12

Definition of level of service:


23/30

4/28/12


24/30

4/28/12

Service Levels of Buses for


25/30

4/28/12

Service Levels of Buses fordifferent routes

Attributes Service levels of the attributes of the services under studyScale Value

Relative weight

values

Route1 Route2 Route3

TC 0.044358 0.029612 0.030229 0.028794TJ 0.057588 0.039689 0.032479 0.041044WD 0.05214 0.034525 0.027761 0.036407WT 0.051362 0.030817 0.028626 0.036504P&R 0.056809 0.039306 0.033938 0.042059AS 0.044358 0.028893 0.02696 0.031751

SA 0.055253 0.048832 0.032865 0.047557CS 0.055253 0.045397 0.030712 0.047304

EB&A 0.056809 0.048365 0.036777 0.047241SW 0.051362 0.024848 0.027615 0.024467V 0.058366 0.050952 0.041993 0.05006

QBs 0.054475 0.041371 0.030729 0.036125

S&Sib 0.059144 0.048594 0.036715 0.045655D,C&Cb 0.054475 0.037396 0.035154 0.040467Ri 0.059144 0.044917 0.029493 0.041508Ct 0.056031 0.045885 0.035978 0.042824

C&C 0.051362 0.026097 0.02975 0.031184N 0.038911 0.027868 0.023447 0.028016

J 0.042802 0.030192 0.024347 0.03334

Total 1 0.723557 0.59557 0.732307


26/30

4/28/12

Level of service

Route1 - 0.723 (Above acceptable level 0.6)

Route2 - 0.595 ( very close to 0.6 )

Route3 0.732(Above acceptable level 0.6)

The LOS of an attribute for a route of bus service

has also been considered as 60percent of thetheoretically possible maximum value LOSi


27/30

4/28/12

Deficiency of service Levels fromthe Acceptance LevelsAttributes Deficiency of the score from the acceptance level

Scale Value

Relative weightvalues Route1 Route2 Route3

TC 0.026615 -0.003 -0.00361 -0.00218TJ 0.034553 -0.00514 0.002073 -0.00649WD 0.031284 -0.00324 0.003523 -0.00512WT 0.030817 0 0.002191 -0.00569P&R 0.034086 -0.00522 0.000148 -0.00797

AS 0.026615 -0.00228 -0.00035 -0.00514SA 0.033152 -0.01568 0.000287 -0.01441CS 0.033152 -0.01225 0.00244 -0.01415

EB&A 0.034086 -0.01428 -0.00269 -0.01316SW 0.030817 0.005969 0.003202 0.00635V 0.035019 -0.01593 -0.00697 -0.01504

QBs 0.032685 -0.00869 0.001956 -0.00344S&Sib 0.035486 -0.01311 -0.00123 -0.01017

D,C&Cb 0.032685 -0.00471 -0.00247 -0.00778Ri 0.035486 -0.00943 0.005993 -0.00602Ct 0.033619 -0.01227 -0.00236 -0.00921

C&C 0.030817 0.00472 0.001067 -0.00037N 0.023346 -0.00452 -0.0001 -0.00467

J 0.025681 -0.00451 0.001334 -0.00766Total 0.6 -0.12356 0.00443 -0.13231


28/30

4/28/12

Conclusion

The LOS of a particular service can be improved byimproving its attributes service level

Route 1

1. Condition & Cleanliness of Bus [C&C]

2. Sufficient number of seats for women [SW ]

. Route2

1. Total journey time (min) [TJ]

2. Walking distance both at the origin (home to busstop and destination stop to destination) (Km)[WD]

3. Waiting time at bus stop (min) [WT ]


29/30

4/28/12

6. Comfort level of the seats ( you can sit comfortablywith enough leg room and side space ) [CS ]


8. Quality of Bus-stop: (Availability of seats at bus

stops, shade from sun & rain, other facilities etc)[QBs ]

9. Route information (Route No. etc.) Written on outsidebody of the bus [ Ri ]

10. Jerking inside the running bus [J]

11. Condition & Cleanliness of Bus [C&C]

. Route 3



30/30

4/28/12

Development of Level ofService Model

Using Maximum Likelihood Estimation theory

Developing a joint probability density function of theobserved sample, called the likelihood function.

Estimating parameter values which maximize thelikelihood function

Bus LOS = a1 f(Travel Cost) + a2 f(Total journeytime)+ a3 f (Walking distance) + a4 f(Waiting

time+ a5 f (Punctuality and Reliability) ++an f(xn)+ C

Documents

Level of Service for Buses