Timetable Graphs and CUI Values Automating their Production

Timetable Graphs and CUI Values Automating their Production John Armstrong, Ian Hood and John Preston 11 February 2009

Contents • Timetable Graphs – Background and History – Applications, Issues and Automated Generation • Data Import and Plotting in Excel • Advantages and Issues • Capacity Utilisation – Two Approaches: UIC 406 and CUI • Conclusions 2

Timetable Graphs

From Tufte (1990)

From Tufte (1990)

Background and History • Timetable Graphs Used Since 1840 s • Now a By-Product of Train Planning Software, but… • Still Widely Used for Train Planning and Control in Continental Europe, Japan and elsewhere • Limited Application in North America, UK • Graphical Approaches Useful for Railway Infrastructure Representation 6

Applications and Issues • Visual Aid/By-Product in UK Train Planning • Useful Starting Point for Preliminary/Small-Scale Train Planning and Capacity Analysis • Arup View: – “Essential and Well-Understood Train Planning Tool” • Spreadsheets: Flexible, Widely-Available and User-Friendly • Manual Data Entry and Manipulation a Problem 7

Automating their Generation • Data Sources – CIF (Common Interface Format) Data 8

BSNW 811450712100805161111100 PXX 1 W 119111124620204 ZEMU BX SWYSW 911100 LOWATRLMN 063015 MFL TB LICLPHMJM 0636 H 0637 H 000006379 FL U LIWDON 0642 00007 LINEWMLDN 0644 0000 LISURBITN 0646 0000 DF FL LIHCRTJN 0647 0000 FL LIWOKING 0655 H 0657 H 065606574 T LIWOKINGJ 0658 H 0000 LIFRBRMN 0705 0000 LIBSNGSTK 0716 0718 071607182 T LIWRTINGJ 0721 H 0000 LIWNCHSTR 0733 0734 H 07330734 T LISHAWFDJ 0737 H 0000 FL LIELGH 0743 0744 H 074307443 T LISOTPKWY 0747 H 0749 07480749 T LISTDENYS 0753 0000 FL LINTHMJN 0754 0000 LISOTON 0756 H 0759 075707594 FL T LIREDBDGE 0802 H 0000 LITOTTON 0803 H 08040804 T LIBKNHRST 0814 H 0816 081508163 T LISWAY 0820 H 0820 T LINMILTON 0824 H 08250825 T LIHINTONA 0829 H 0829 T LICHRISTC 0833 H 08340834 T LIPOKSDWN 0837 H 08380838 T LIBOMO 0841 H 0843 H 084208433 T LIBRANKSM 0848 H 08482 T LIPSTONE 0851 H 0851 T LIPOOLE 0854 H 0856 085508562 T LIHMWTHY 0900 0901 09000901 T LIWARHAM 0906 H 0908 090709082 T LIWOOL 0913 H 09140914 T LIMORETON 0920 H 0920 T X LIDRCHS 0927 0928 H 092709281 T X LIDRCHJN 0929 H 0000 LIUPWEY 0934 H 0935 0934 T LTWEYMTH 09393 TF 1 1 9

Automating their Generation • Data Sources • Importing the Data to Excel 10

11

Automating their Generation • Data Sources • Importing the Data to Excel • Plotting the Graphs in Excel 12

13

Automating their Generation • Data Sources • Importing the Data to Excel • Plotting the Graphs in Excel • Advantages – Speed and Accuracy - Time and Cost Savings 14

Automating their Generation • Data Sources • Importing the Data to Excel • Plotting the Graphs in Excel • Advantages • Issues – Charting Method and ‘Data Feedback’ – Providing Additional Train Information – Multiple Tracks 15

Capacity Utilisation

Background • Definition of Capacity as such does not exist [and] railway infrastructure capacity depends on the way it is utilised (UIC 406) 17

Background • Definition of Capacity • Objectives – Making Best Use of Potential Capacity – Maintaining Service Quality/Reliability 18

Measuring Capacity Utilisation • Assessment of Timetable ‘White Space’ • Identification of Conflicts between Trains and Calculation of Delays – Simulation • UIC 406 – Timetable Compression by Signal Section 19

From UIC 406 (2004) 20

Measuring Capacity Utilisation • Assessment of Timetable ‘White Space’ • Identification of Conflicts between Trains and Calculation of Delays – Simulation • UIC 406 – Timetable Compression by Signal Section – Capacity Consumption = Total Consumption Time/Time Window 21

Measuring Capacity Utilisation • Assessment of Timetable ‘White Space’ • Identification of Conflicts between Trains and Calculation of Delays – Simulation • UIC 406 • CUI (Capacity Utilisation Index) – Timetable Compression by Route Section 22

From Gibson, Cooper and Ball (2002) 23

Measuring Capacity Utilisation • Analysis: UIC 406 vs. CUI – Technical headway vs. Planning headway – Overall signalled route vs. separate consideration of junction margins and platform reoccupation times – Full simulation vs. simpler, spreadsheet-based tool 24

Conclusions

Conclusions • Timetable Graph Production – Advantages of spreadsheet-based automation • Speed and Accuracy • Simplicity and Reduced Cost • Basis of Macroscopic Capacity Analysis and Planning Tool 26

Conclusions • Timetable Graph Production – Advantages of spreadsheet-based automation – Issues • ‘Data Feedback’ • Provision of Additional Information • Handling of Multi-track Route Sections 27

Conclusions • Capacity Utilisation Analysis – UIC 406 more detailed and comprehensive than CUI – CUI better suited to preliminary, spreadsheet-based macroscopic capacity utilisation analyses, but… – Inclusion of junctions and stations in analysis requires further consideration of junction margins, etc. 28

Questions?