European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
PEDESTRIAN MICROSIMULATION OF METRO-BUS INTERCHANGES.
A CASE STUDY IN SANTIAGO DE CHILE
Rodrigo Fernandez and Sebastian Seriani
College of Engineering and Applied Sciences
Universidad de Los Andes, Santiago – Chile
Av. San Carlos de Apoquindo 2200, Las Condes, Santiago – Chile
Tel: +56-2-412 9321; Fax: +56-2-412 9642; e-mail: [email protected]
Pablo Allard
Faculty of Architecture, Design and Urban Studies
Universidad Catolica de Chile
El Comendador 1966, Providencia, Santiago – Chile
Tel: +56-2-354 7743; email: [email protected]
1
INTRODUCTION
Metro stations are not just a single node in a transport network, but also a place
within the city. In this sense, some authors (Busquets, 2006; Lopez, 2008) define
a metro station as a "node-place", understanding “node” as an access point to
underground trains and other transport modes and “place” as a specific part of
the city with a concentration of infrastructure, buildings and public spaces. In this
way metro stations are complex urban places which must solve the problems of
mobility as well as connectivity and integration between the station and the
surrounding urban area. As a node-place there are at least five pedestrian
circulation spaces: the train-platform space, the platform-stair space, the
concourse, complementary – e.g., shopping – space, and the city.
Despite the complexity of this type of urban places it has been observed in
developing countries a lack of design guidelines for metro stations and
surrounding areas. For example, Metro de Santiago S.A. makes use of microsimulation to study pedestrian movements. However, these models are only used
to analyse the circulation within the area of administration of the metro company;
i.e., inside stations. This approach considers the station as an isolated project, so
it ignores the problems produced outside such as access points, pedestrian
paths, metro-bus interchanges, etc.
To solve the above deficiency the objective of this research was to analyse by
means of pedestrian micro-simulation metro-bus interchange spaces in order to
propose design guidelines, taking as case study Santiago de Chile. Specific
objectives are (a) to identify the variables that provide greater efficiency and
safety in those spaces; (b) to simulate different scenarios using the pedestrian
simulation model LEGION; (c) to propose design guidelines for pedestrian
spaces at metro-bus interchanges; and (d) to implement the recommendations to
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
1
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
the recently opened terminal station on Line 1 of Metro de Santiago: Los
Dominicos Station.
2
CASE STUDY
Los Dominicos Station was the case study, because it is the newest terminal
station of Line 1 of Metro de Santiago in the eastern sector of the city opened in
January 2010. It is also an important interchange between metro, buses, and
taxis. In addition, it will be connected with a feeder tram project in Las Condes
borough (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Projected feeder tram route to Los Dominicos Station
Associated with Los Dominicos Station a large area of urban spaces is projected:
24000 m2 of green areas, playgrounds, cycle and pedestrian paths; 8000 m2 of
shopping and service areas; and 430 underground parking spaces (Metro de
Santiago, 2008 and 2009; OCUC, 2009). Figure 2 shows the different circulation
spaces as defined by Seriani (2010). These are the following.
2.1
Train-Platform Space
At level -5 are operate trains with 9 coaches and a total capacity of 1500
passengers. The platform is 4.15 m wide and 135 m long. During the morning
peak period the passenger demand in the eastbound direction are 5600
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
2
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
passengers per hour while in the westbound direction the demand reaches
almost 6000 pass/h.
2.2
Platform-Stair Space
Between levels -5 and -4 stairs link the platform with two concourses (east and
west). The east concourse is connected with the platform through three stairs of
3- and 5-m width (two upstream and one downstream). The west concourse is
connected with the platform through two 3-m width stairs (one upstream and one
downstream).
2.3
Concourse
At level -4 there are two concourses: east and west. In the east concourse there
are 6 windows at the ticket office and 20 exit gates. In the west concourse there
are 3 windows at the ticket office and 4 exit gates. There are 8 entry turnstiles at
each concourse and two escalators with alternative stairs that connect with upper
levels.
2.4
Complementary Space
At level -1 and -2 are located shops, restaurants, services, customer office, metro
service area, and toilets. This level is connected with the street level (urban
space) by means of two escalators and alternative stairs. In addition, at level -3
and -4 will be located 430 parking spaces.
2.5
Urban Space
At level 0 or street level is Los Dominicos Square, a place with cycle paths,
pedestrian walkways, green areas, playground, and a handcraft market. At this
level the station has 3 entrances (southeast, northeast and west) from the
Apoquindo Ave, the eastern section of the main avenue of the city. These
entrances are connected with four bus stops where trunk and feeder bus routes
operate.
Trunk buses have a capacity of 150 passengers each and operate with a
frequency of 5 minutes. Feeder buses have 45-pass capacity and the same
frequency. In addition, the metro station will be connected with a future feeder
tram route. It is assumed that trams will have a capacity of 300 passengers and
they will arrive every 5 minutes. This will increase the passenger demand of the
metro station to 13000 passengers per hour per direction approximately.
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
3
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
Urban space (Los Dominicos Sq)
Concourse
Complementary space
Platform-stair
Train-platform
Figure 2. Pedestrian circulation spaces in Los Dominicos Station
3
METODOLOGY
3.1
General Issues
Nine stations of Metro de Santiago network were studied to identify the variables
that change the physical and operational design of stations of Metro de Santiago.
Table 1 shows the characteristics of these stations.
Table 1. Studied stations of Metro de Santiago
Station
Demand
[pass/day]
Inner area
2
[m ]
Dominicos
E.
Militar
U. de
Chile
P. de
Valdivia
Los
Leones
Bellavista
La
Moneda
Cal y
Canto
Baquedano
14500
95700
92000
53200
49500
32100
49300
60800
31800
32000
27000
12139
5228
20803
8189
5798
3267
6041
In addition, during the morning peak period some operational variables were
observed such as the split of passengers between escalators (69%) and stairs
(31%), the distribution of passengers with valid smart cards (66%) and
purchasing tickets/cards (34%), as well as service times of the ticket offices,
entry turnstiles, exit gates, and inside shops. In Metro de Santiago the entry to
platforms is via turnstiles operated with both smart cards and normal tickets. The
exit is via one-way slamming gates in which no ticket or pass is needed to exit.
The values of the service times found in Metro de Santiago are shown in Table 2.
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
4
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
Table 2. Service times through various devices in Metro de Santiago
Values
Ticket
Entry
Exit
Inside
[s/pass]
office
turnstiles
gates
shops
Minimum
9
1
0.1
20
Average
12
2
1
40
Maximum
18
3
1
60
Table 3 shows the physical, spatial and operational variables selected for
simulation and related to each circulation space defined in a metro station
(Seriani, 2010). For example, platform width was considered because it varies
from 3.5 and 4.5 m; however, the length of the platform was not regarded
because it remains fixed for all stations (135 m).
Circulation
Space
Train-platform
Platform-stairs
Concourse
Complementary
space
Urban space
Table 3. Variables studied in metro stations
Physical
Spatial
Operational
variable
variable
variable
Platform width
Columns opposite Passengers in the
train doors
train
Passengers on
the platform
Stairs width
Handrails in stairs Passengers on
Stairs per platform Escalators
platform
Distance to
Passengers on
platform edge
stairs
Amount and
Guardrails and
Pass to/from
location of ticket
channelization
platforms and
office, turnstiles,
devices
complementary
and exit gates
spaces
Width of shopping Handrail in stairs
Passengers
corridors
Pedestrian ramps to/from concourse
Raiser, tread, and Corners
and urban space
platform of stairs
Urban furniture
Footpath width
Handrails in stairs Passengers
Distance to
Urban furniture
to/from buses
crossings
Pass at bus stops
Distance to stops
Signal timings
Once the relevant variables were identified a simulation study was carried out by
a pedestrian micro simulation model to determine optimal values of the relevant
design variables. Then, results were compared with the standards established in
both national and international guidelines (MINVU, 2009; NFPA130, 2007; Metro
de Madrid, 2009) and classified according to the Fruin (1971) Level of Service
(LOS) for pedestrians.
The pedestrian micro simulation model used was LEGION Studio 2006.
According to Ronald (2007) unlike other models LEGION represent each
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
5
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
pedestrian as an intelligent entity capable of differentiating their behavior,
preferences, personal characteristics, and including physical and psychological
factors such as dissatisfaction (inconvenience, discomfort, and frustration).
Moreover, in the LEGION model there are no cells or grids and therefore
pedestrian movements are considered continuous. Thus, the space is free from
artificial restrictions and ensures a real representation of pedestrian movements.
The model also has a graphical output of the physical space, which allows users
to study both open and closed spaces, such as metro stations and the urban
surroundings.
3.2
Simulations for Design Guidelines
In order to obtain optimum design standards via simulation, the value of each
variable was drawn against some performance index. Once an inflexion point
was found, for which the value of the variable does not significantly improve the
performance, indicates that an optimum was reached. For example, the platform
width was tested against pedestrian capacity (maximum flow of pedestrian on the
platform). It is apparent that as the platform width increases, pedestrian flow can
be increased. However, for a given passenger demand, there is a width of the
platform for which there is no much gain in capacity. That width is the optimum
for the simulated conditions.
As the studied case is a terminal station it was considered that there are no
passengers on the platform waiting to board the train and that all passengers on
the train get off at the station. To consider different demand levels, it was
assumed different numbers of alighting passengers as percentage of the train
capacity (1504 pass); these were 100, 75, 50 and 25 percent of the capacity.
3.2.1 Train-Platform Space
The above strategy is presented for the maximum flow of passengers on the
platform; i.e., the platform capacity. In Figure 3 it can be observed that the
platform capacity can be increased up to a platform width of 4.00 metres. Above
that figure, no major gain is achieved as the platform width increases; for
instance for 4.50 m. This happens for any number of alighting passengers
expressed as percentage of the train capacity. Therefore, a 4.00-m platform
would be the optimum width for Los Dominicos Station.
A second analysis made in the train-platform space was the construction of
pedestrian speed-flow relationships on platforms. This is shown in Figure 4. As
can be seen in the figure, for a platform width of 3.50 m a capacity of 315
passengers per minute is achieved for an alighting demand equals to 75% the
train capacity. For other widths, capacity could not been obtained, but the curves
have the characteristic form of speed-flow relationships.
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
6
Platform capacity [pass/min]
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Platform width [m]
100%
75%
50%
25%
Figure 3. Platform capacity as function of platform width and alighting demand
Pedestrian speed [m/s]
1.40
1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Pedestrian flow [pass/min]
4.5 m
4.0 m
3.8 m
3.5 m
Figure 4. Pedestrian speed-flow relationships for different platform widths
Helbing et al (2000) state that a column located opposite to an exit door of a
corridor can increases the pedestrian flow as well as it can reduce the pedestrian
density. Therefore, with a column of 0.40 m diameter at 0.60 m opposite the exit
door the pedestrian flow was increased in 3pass/min and the density was
reduced in 11% in the corridor. Following this results, the use of 0.40-m diameter
columns at 0.60 m opposite the train doors was tested. Results are not
conclusive, so this measure is not recommended.
3.2.2 Platform-stair Space
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
7
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
In these experiments five design variables were tested: number of stairs, stair
width, escalator width, distance to stairs from the platform edge, and number of
handrails. Results are shown in the following figures.
Figure 5 shows that the optimum stair width is 3.50 meters. This width allows a
one-way passenger flow of 250 pass/min. In addition, for that width the maximum
evacuation time of the platform – 240 seconds according to NFPA130 (2007) – is
achieved in the case of an alighting demand below 50% the train capacity. In the
case of an alighting demand of 100% the train capacity, the stairs must have
more that 10 m width to achieve the aforementioned standard.
However, as can be seen in Figure 6, if the amount of stairs increases, the
maximum evacuation time decreases, so that if two stairs per platform are
provided, the maximum evacuation time is achieved for any alighting demand.
This implies that if the alighting demand is more that the 50% of the train
capacity, at least two 3.5-m stairs should be provided.
Platform evacuation time [s]
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
Stair width [m]
100%
75%
50%
25%
Figure 5. Platform evacuation time versus stair width and alighting demand
With respect to the distance of stairs to the platform edge, it was found that this
variable does not affect the platform evacuation time.
In relation to the handrails, three handrails in an exit stair (two at the edges and
one central) generate between 1 to 4% less passenger density than two
handrails. However, the central handrail increases the evacuation time between 2
and 8%, because it works as a bottleneck.
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
8
Platform evacuation time [s]
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
1
2
Number of stairs
100%
75%
50%
25%
Figure 6. Platform evacuation time versus exit stairs and alighting demand
Finally, Figure 7 shows that the optimum escalator width is 1.65 m. This width
achieves a maximum one-way pedestrian flow of 115 pass/min. In addition, it
was found that one 1.8-m width escalator can cope with the maximum platform
evacuation time for an alighting demand equals to 50% the train capacity.
Platform evacuation time [s]
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
1.10
1.65
1.80
Escalator width [m]
100%
75%
50%
25%
Figura 7. Platform evacuation time versus escalator width and alighting demand
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
9
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
3.2.3 Concourse Space
For the simulation of the concourse space it was assumed that 369 boarding and
alighting passengers (25% the train capacity) per concourse access are
circulating in this area. This assumes that Los Dominicos Station will work as a
normal intermediate station in the future. The accesses to the concourse are four:
two exits from each platform and two exits/entrances to/from the complementary
space (see Figure 14).
It was found that as the number of entry turnstiles increases, the clearance time
of the concourse decreases. This time reaches the minimum value of 580
seconds when either two sets of 4 turnstiles each or one set of 7 turnstiles are
provided. In addition, for two sets of 4 turnstiles the minimum density on the
concourse is achieved: 0.98 passengers per square meter. Therefore, this seems
to be the optimum configuration of turnstiles.
With respect to the exit gates from the platform, it was found that two groups of 6
gates each is the optimum recommended configuration. This configuration far
exceeds the standard of maximum platform evacuation time of 240 seconds. This
is shown in Figure 8.
Platform evacuation time [s]
250
200
150
100
50
0
2 groups of 3
2 groups of 6
2 groups of 8
Configuration of exit gates
Figure 8. Platform evacuation time and exit gate configuration
In relation to the location of the ticket office, if this is located either at the left or
right of the concourse, instead of at the centre as is shown in Figure 14, the
minimum clearance time of the concourse is obtained (795 seconds). However, if
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
10
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
the ticket office is located at the centre the smallest density of passenger on the
concourse is observed: 1.07 pass/m2, because queues develop toward the
concourse accesses without obstructing the circulation to the entry turnstiles to
the platforms.
Finally, any form of channelization of passengers is recommended to avoid their
circulation just in front the ticket office. This produces a concourse density 56%
less than without channelization (0.82 pass/m2).
3.2.4 Complementary Space
This space was simulated with the same circulating demand as the concourse
space. As expected, as the width of the shopping corridors increases, the
passengers flow increases proportionally. This takes place up to a corridor width
of 7.50 meters. Over that width the passenger flow increases less than
proportionally. Therefore, 7.50 m seems to be the optimum width of the shopping
corridors for which minimum densities of 1.14 pass/m2 and maximum flows of
655 passengers per minute in both directions are attained. If urban furniture is
put in the corridors (e.g., coffee tables) the passenger flow is reduced almost
30% (465 pass/min). However, urban furniture can be located at corners where
the natural strait trajectories of passengers are not obstructed.
In relation to the length of the platform of stairs in shopping corridors, it appears
that a 1.50-m platform length in a 4-step stair is better than a 4-step stair without
platform. It was found that a stairs with platform increases the flow in 31% (400
pass/min) and reduces the density in 62% (0.99 pass/m 2). In addition, if a stair is
replaced with a 10%-gradient ramp, the flow can increase to 410 pass/min and
the density can be reduced to 0.65 pass/m2.
Finally, a central handrail is recommended in shopping stairs to arrange the flow
in each direction. This increases the flow by 20% (186 pass/min-direction) and
reduces the density by 55% (1.17 pass/m2) compared with a stair without central
handrail.
3.2.5 Urban Space
Three analyses ware made in relation to the urban space: The capacity of a
pavement with respect to its width, the dissatisfaction (inconvenience, discomfort,
and frustration) with respect to the distance from the station to the nearest
pedestrian crossing, and the dissatisfaction with respect to the distance to the
nearest bus stop. For these analyses the same circulating demands as in the
complementary spaces was considered.
As can be seen in Figure 9, it seems that the optimum pavement width is 7.00 m.
For that width the capacity of a pavement reaches almost 500 pass/min in both
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
11
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
directions. This capacity is almost the same as the capacity of a 10-m width
pavement.
Pavement capacity [pass/min]
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
Pavement width [m]
Figure 9. Pavement capacity versus width
Figure 10 shows the dissatisfaction of passengers with respect to the distance to
the nearest pedestrian crossing. According to the figure, the inflexion point in the
curve is 26 meters, indicating that this is the optimum distance between the
station and the pedestrian crossing. Similarly, Figure 11 shows the inflexion point
for the distance between the station and the nearest bus stop: 24 m. Therefore, it
seems that the nearest interchange with other public transport modes such as
bus or walking should not be 25 m away from a metro station.
It should be noted that in LEGION, dissatisfaction is the sum of three physical
and psychological variables: inconvenience (I), which is the physical effort to walk
a certain distance; discomfort (D), which is the lack of personal space; and
frustration (F), which is the need of reducing walking speed in congested spaces.
Then, when the distance to an origin (pedestrian crossing, bus stop) increases, I
increases, but D and F decrease because there is more space and so less
pedestrian density. This in turn increases walking speed. That is the reason why,
as the distance to the crossings and stops increases, dissatisfaction decreases;
i.e., variable I weight less that the other two variables D and F in the passengers’
dissatisfaction.
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
12
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
12
Dissatisfaction
10
8
6
4
2
0
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
Distance to the pedestrian crossing [m]
Figure 10. Dissatisfaction versus distance to pedestrian crossing
12
Dissatisfaction
10
8
6
4
2
0
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
Distance to the bus stop [m]
Figure 11. Dissatisfaction versus distance to bus stops
Two additional issues were tested by simulation. One is the requirement that
urban furniture should not be located on the pavement because it reduces its
capacity by 26%. Another result is that central handrails in the stairs of the station
access can increase the passenger flow in 22% (up to 150 pass/min-direction)
compared with a stair with no central handrail. This also split the pedestrian flow
per direction so that the density on the stairs is 26% less than without central
handrail, reaching a maximum density of 2.12 pass/m 2.
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
13
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
4
SIMULATION SCENARIOS AT LOS DOMINICOS STATION
In this chapter two scenarios are analysed at Los Dominicos Station. One is the
present conditions in which the passenger demand is about 6000 passengers per
hour per direction; this is called the “base scenario” hereafter. Another is a future
scenario with a feeder tram operating at Los Dominicos Station for which
passenger demand increases to 13000 pass/h-direction; it will be called “future
scenario” henceforth.
In terms of physical design of Los Dominicos Station meet almost all the
recommendations stated in the above chapter. All platforms are 4.15-m (> 4 m)
wide. There are three stairs between platforms and concourses, one 5-m wide
with central handrail. In addition, there are 8 turnstiles (> 7) in each concourse
(east and west). Finally, pavements around the station are 10-m (> 7 m) wide.
However, there are other circulation spaces which do not meet the minimum
standards.
The first problem detected is in the platform-stair space. In this site the west and
east stairs are 3-m wide, without central handrail. This makes that passenger
density reaches an E Level of Service (LOS) in the base scenario and even an F
LOS in the future scenario (see Figures 12 and 13 at the end of the paper).
Another problem is located in the concourse space. In the west concourse there
are four exit gates. As these are beside the entry turnstiles, this increases the
passenger density up to LOS E and F in both scenarios (Figures 14 and 15).
In the complementary space the shopping corridor narrows to 6 m in the
proximity of the concourse, and there is some urban furniture near the access to
the concourse. This will produce density problems as the LOS will be E and F in
the future scenario (Figure 17). However, for the base scenario the simulation
shows no problem with LOS A and B at this space (Figure 16).
Finally, the urban space, because of the wide of the pavements, pedestrian
crossings, and footpaths to/from the station shows LOS E or F in both the base
and future scenarios, as shown in Figures 18 and 19.
5
CONCLUSIONS
Results of this study are divided into two parts. The first part corresponds to the
development of design recommendations according to each pedestrian
circulation space. For example, for the train-platform space it is recommended a
platform of 4-meters width if 100% of passengers get off the train at once (about
1500 passengers); for the platform-stairs space it is suggested to provide two exit
stairs if the number of passenger getting off the train reaches 50% its capacity;
for the concourse space more than seven turnstiles or two groups of four
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
14
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
turnstiles should be provided for an unloading of 25% the train capacity; for
complementary space it is recommended a commercial corridor of 7.5-m width
for the same passenger demand (bidirectional flow); finally for the urban space a
pavement width greater than 7.0 m near the station accesses is recommended
(bidirectional flow). The second part of results consists of the application of these
recommendations to Los Dominicos Station in Santiago de Chile. Accordingly, it
was found that for the base scenario the demand is not big enough to cause
conflict between pedestrians and their environment, leading in general to
pedestrian levels of service between A and C. However, in a scenario that
considers a feeder tram project, conflicts arise in the platform-stairs space,
concourse space, complementary space, and urban spaces reducing the
pedestrian level of service to E or even F. In such a case the station will require
the use of our design recommendations to work properly.
To conclude, this study will allow engineers and architects to identifying conflicts,
analysing pedestrian movements and classifying them by space, and checking if
that circulation elements satisfy the passenger demand.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Resources for the presentation of this paper came from the College of
Engineering and Applied Sciences of the University of Los Andes (Chile). The
authors would like to thanks Metro de Santiago S.A. for providing operational
data and access to the micro simulation model LEGION for this study. Results
and opinions are the sole responsibility of the authors of this article.
REFERENCES
Busquets, J. (2006). Defining the Urbanistic Project – Ten Contemporary
Approachs. Harvard Design Magazine. Fall 2006/Winter 2007. 71-73
Fruin, J.J. (1971). Designing for pedestrians: a level-of-service concept. Highway
Research Record 377, 1-15.
Helbing, D., Farkas, I. and Vicsek, T. (2000). Application of microscopic
pedestrian simulation model. Nature 407, 208-409.
Lopez, A. (2008). El metro como infraestructura de proyecto urbano: tres
escenarios de intervención para la estación de metro Plaza Maipú. Architecture
and Master on Urban Development Thesis. Pontificia Universidad Católica de
Chile, Santiago.
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
15
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
Metro de Madrid S.A. (2009). Infraestructuras Módulo 7: Diseño de Estaciones
Accesibilidad. Dirección de Arquitectura, Obra Civil y Patrimonio Unidad de Obra
Civil, Madrid.
Metro de Santiago (2009). Memoria Anual (2008). Metro de Santiago S.A.,
Santiago.
Metro de Santiago (2008). Memoria Anual (2007). Metro de Santiago S.A.,
Santiago.
MINVU (2009). Recomendaciones para el Diseño
Infraestructura Vial Urbana (REDEVU), Santiago.
de
Elementos
de
NFPA 130, (2007). Standard for Fixed Guideway Transit and Passenger Rail
Systems. Chapter 5, Stations. National Fire Protection Association. An
International Codes and Standards Organization, Massachusetts.
OCUC (2009). Anteproyecto de arquitectura entorno estación metro Los
Domínicos. Observatorio de Ciudades de la Universidad Católica de Chile,
Santiago.
Ronald, N. (2007). Agent-based approaches to pedestrian modelling. Master of
Engineering Science Thesis. The University of Melbourne, Melbourne.
Seriani, S. (2010). Microsimulación Peatonal en Espacios de Intercambio MetroBus. Estación Los Domínicos. Civil Engineering and Master on Urban Projects
Thesis, Universidad de los Andes and Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile,
Santiago.
East-west train direction
West-east train direction
West
stair
Symbols
NS Fruin in flat areas:
Color
Name
Value
Central
stair
Name
NS Fruin in stairs:
Color
Value
East stair
Variables:
-Exit demand train to platform 5.400
[pass/h] in west-east train direction.
-Entry demand platform to train 5.760
[pass/h] in east-west train direction.
Figure 12. Densities in train-platform-stair space, base scenario (pass/m2)
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
16
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
East-west train direction
West-east train direction
West
stair
Central
stair
Symbols
NS Fruin in flat areas:
Name
Color
Value
Name
NS Fruin in stairs:
Color
Value
East stair
Variables:
-Exit demand train to platform 12.600
[pass/h] in west-east train direction.
-Entry demand platform to train 12.960
[pass/h] in east-west train direction.
Figura 13. Densities in train-platform-stair space, future scenario (pass/m2)
Ticket
office
Ticket
office
Northeast underground
access
East concourse
West concourse
Turnstiles
Exit gates
Southeast underground
access
West underground
access
Symbols
NS Fruin in flat areas:
Name
Color
Value
Name
NS Fruin in stairs:
Color
Value
Variables:
-Exit demand platform to east concourse
3.780 [pass/h] and to west concourse
1.620 [pass/h].
-Entry demand city to east and west
concourse
2.880
[pass/h]
(each
concourse).
Figure 14. Densities in concourse space, base scenario (pass/m2)
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
17
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
Ticket
office
Northeast underground
access
Ticket
office
East concourse
West concourse
Turnstiles
Exit gates
Southeast underground
access
West underground
access
Symbols
NS Fruin in flat areas:
Name
Color
Value
Name
NS Fruin in stairs:
Color
Value
Variables:
-Exit demand platform to east concourse
9.261 [pass/h] and to west concourse
3.780 [pass/h].
-Entry demand urban to east concourse
10.521 [pass/h] and to west concourse
2.880 [pass/h].
Figure 15. Densities in concourse space, future scenario (pass/m2)
Shopping
Stair access to east
concourse
Urban furniture
Exit to Los Dominicos
Market
Exit to Los Dominicos
Market
Symbols
NS Fruin in flat areas:
Name
Color
Value
NS Fruin in stairs:
Color
Name
Value
Variables:
-Exit demand east concourse
complementary space 189 [pass/h]
to
-Entry demand urban to complementary
space 189 [pass/h]
Figure 16. Densities in complementary space, base scenario (pass/m2)
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
18
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
Commerce
Stair access to east
concourse
Exit to Los Dominicos
Market
Furniture in
public space
Exit to Los Dominicos Market
and feeder tram
Symbols
NS Fruin in flat areas:
Name
Color
Value
NS Fruin in stairs:
Color
Name
Value
Variables:
-Exit demand east concourse to
complementary space 441 [pass/h] and to
tram 4.032 [pass/h].
-Entry demand tram to concourse 5.760
[pass/h] and to complementary space 441
[pass/h]
2
Figure 17. Densities in complementary space, future scenario (pass/m )
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
19
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
Northeast bus stop
Av. El Alba
Furniture in
public space
Northwest bus stop
Northeast access
Av. Apoquindo
Southeast access
West access
Southwest bus stop 1
Access to
complementary
space
Southwest bus stop 2
Symbols
NS Fruin in flat areas:
Name
Color
Value Name
NS Fruin in stairs:
Color
Value
Variables:
Exit demand:
-East concourse to complementary space 189
[pass/h].
-East concourse to urban 1.890 [pass/h] (each
access: northeast and southeast).
-West concourse to urban 1.620 [pass/h] (west
access).
Entry demand:
-Urban to east concourse 1.440 [pass/h] (each
access: northeast and southeast).
-Urban to west concourse 2.880 [pass/h] (west
access).
Figure 18. Densities in urban space, base scenario (pass/m2)
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
20
European Transport Conference 2010, 11-13 October 2010, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
Northeast bus stop
Av. El Alba
Furniture in
public space
Northwest bus stop
Northeast access
Las Condes
feeder tram
Av. Apoquindo
Southeast access
West access
Southwest bus stop 1
Access to
complementary
space
Southwest bus stop 2
Symbols
NS Fruin in flat areas:
Name
Color
Value Name
Color
Value
Variables:
Exit demand:
-East concourse to complementary space 441
[pass/h] and direct to tram 4.032 [pass/h].
-East concourse to city (northeast access) 1.890
[pass/h].
-East concourse to urban (southeast access) 2.898
[pass/h] (1.008 [pax/h] direct to tram).
-West concourse to urban (west access) 3.780
[pass/h] (2.160 [pax/h] direct to tram).
-Concourse (east and west) to tram 7.200 [pass/h].
Entry demand:
-Urban to east concourse (northeast access) 1.440
[pass/h].
-Urban to east concourse (southeast access) 2.880
[pass/h] (1.440 [pass/h] from the tram).
-Urban to west concourse (west access) 2.880
[pass/h].
-Urban to complementary space 441 [pass/h] and
from tram direct to east concourse 5.760 [pass/h].
-Tram to concourse (east and west) 7.200 [pass/h].
Figura 19. Densities in urban space, future scenario (pass/m2)
© Association for European Transport and contributors 2010
21