The Effects of the Design Factors of the Train-Platform Interface on Pedestrian Flow Rates

Journal of Advanced Transportation

Fernández

Luangboriboon

et al. 2019

Self Cite

The objective of this work was to study the effect of the ratio between passengers boarding and alighting on the passengers’ behaviour at metro stations. A mock-up of a vehicle and the relevant portion of the platform was built to run a series of simulation experiments at University College London’s Pedestrian Accessibility and Movement Environment Laboratory (PAMELA). Different scenarios were tested based on the next generation London Underground trains. The scenarios were classified according to different load conditions. Four types of behaviour are described. In most cases boarding is first, and passengers compete for space to enter the train. In the case of alighting, first passengers are faster than the rest of alighters due to the space available on the platform as boarding passengers give way to those who are getting off the train. In addition, alighters form lanes of flow depending on the number of passengers waiting to board the train on the platform. With respect to the train, if the density inside the train is higher than 4 passengers per square metre, then the flow at the doors starts to decrease. More experiments are needed to study the relationship between platform density and boarding and alighting time.

Section: Discussion and Future Workmentioning

confidence: 60%

Section: Journal Of Advanced Transportationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Effect of Boarding and Alighting Ratio on Passengers’ Behaviour at Metro Stations by Laboratory Experiments

Journal of Advanced Transportation

Fernández

Luangboriboon

et al. 2019

Self Cite

“…Different from the laboratory experiments done by Dameen et al [33], Fernandez et al [34] and Fujiyama et al [35], another behaviour observed at PAMELA was that the capacity of the train doors will not only depends on the door widths but also on the ratio R. If the value of R increases, then the number of lanes of flow for those passengers alighting will decrease. This was only presented in the crowded situations, due to the high number of passengers boarding and alighting (reaching more than 4 pass/m 2 ).…”

Section: Discussion and Future Workmentioning

confidence: 61%

“…In such a case, the alighting rate is 1.6 pass/s. Nonetheless, [34] only considered passenger alighting, Fujiyama et al [35] stated that for a bidirectional flow (boarding and alighting) the station and vehicle should be designed with a vertical gap of 50 mm, reaching a maximum flow of 1.42 passengers per second. Moreover, Karekla and Tyler [36] proposed a model to predict the dwell time based on laboratory experiments, in which a small vertical gap can reduce the dwell time by 8%.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental Study for Estimating the Passenger Space at Metro Stations with Platform Edge Doors

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

Fujiyama

2018

Self Cite

The objective of this work was to study the effect of the ratio between passengers boarding and alighting on the passengers' behaviour at metro stations. A mock-up of a vehicle and the relevant portion of the platform was built to run a series of simulation experiments at University College London's Pedestrian Accessibility and Movement Environment Laboratory (PAMELA). Different scenarios were tested based on the next generation London Underground trains. The scenarios were classified according to different load conditions. Four types of behaviour are described. In most cases boarding is first, and passengers compete for space to enter the train. In the case of alighting, first passengers are faster than the rest of alighters due to the space available on the platform as boarding passengers give way to those who are getting off the train. In addition, alighters form lanes of flow depending on the number of passengers waiting to board the train on the platform. With respect to the train, if the density inside the train is higher than 4 passengers per square metre, then the flow at the doors starts to decrease. More experiments are needed to study the relationship between platform density and boarding and alighting time.

“…Although vertical gaps could be deemed negative for equal accessibility, recent laboratory studies show that a small vertical gap can actually reduce the BAT (21). However, that study only considered alighting passengers in a laboratory experiment, but in (22) it is stated that for a bidirectional flow (boarding and alighting) the PTI should be designed with a vertical gap of 50 mm, reaching a maximum flow of 1.42 passengers per second (for a door width of 1.80 m and setback of 800 mm). In the same line of research, in (23) it was found that a small vertical gap can also increase doors' capacity when the horizontal gap is increased.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combined Effect of Platform Edge Doors and Level Access on Boarding and Alighting Process in London Underground

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

Rodríguez

Holloway

2017

Platform edge doors (PEDs) are used in metro stations to improve passengers' safety and comfort, whilst a step-free access with minimum gap between the train and the platform is desirable on the grounds of accessibility. There is little research focused on the effect of PEDs on the boarding and alighting time (BAT) and passenger behaviour patterns. On the other hand, many authors have treated the impact of vertical and horizontal gaps in passengers' boarding and alighting. On London Underground (LU), there is always step-free access between the train and the platform when there are PEDs; but even at some platforms without PEDs there may be level access provided by platform humps. The objective of this paper is to study the combined effect of PEDs and level access on the boarding and alighting process. To this aim two LU platforms, both with level access, one with PEDs and one without PEDs, have been compared. This was done analysing bespoke video footage. The results show that PEDs on their own have no overall negative impact on the BAT and that in most situations they encourage passengers to wait beside the doors. It was also found that demand (number of boarders, alighters, and passengers on the train) is more important on the BAT and passenger behaviours than the presence of PEDs.