Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników

Znaleziono wyników: 3

Liczba wyników na stronie
first rewind previous Strona / 1 next fast forward last
Wyniki wyszukiwania
help Sortuj według:

help Ogranicz wyniki do:
first rewind previous Strona / 1 next fast forward last
EN
Background: Over the past three decades, significant demographic shifts, suburban migration, and limited transport connectivity between suburban areas and city centers in Poland have led to increased private vehicle use and congestion in urban centers. These trends have contributed to environmental degradation and a decline in quality of life. In response, local authorities have been compelled to promote public transportation services and implement infrastructure solutions-one of which is the development of a network of Park-and-Ride (P&R) facilities. Methods: This study presents a methodology that combines the Catchment Area approach with an appropriate Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) technique to identify, evaluate, and rank potential P&R facility locations. The Catchment Area method is employed to determine viable P&R sites within the city, emphasizing connections to major roadways and traffic flows. The MCDA method, selected for its suitability, enables the ranking of these locations from most to least favorable, based on a defined set of evaluation criteria and stakeholder preferences. Results: The proposed methodology is applied to a case study in a Polish city. The results show that integrating the Catchment Area method with the most appropriate MCDA method enhances the decision-making process and supports the recommendation of a balanced, compromise solution. Conclusions: This study supports the sustainable development of urban transport systems by providing a robust framework for planning P&R infrastructure. The proposed approach effectively addresses the needs of key stakeholders-including users, non-users, and local authorities alike.
EN
This paper presents an approach combining simulation and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to model and evaluate options for passenger service organisation at a terminal. The methodology is motivated by changes planned by the EU concerning the introduction of the Entry/Exit System (EES) for advanced border control of passengers crossing the Schengen border having an impact on a passenger flow at the Border Crossing Point (BCP). The primary outcome is the selection of a recommended process configuration, including the types and number of servers required to ensure an efficient passenger flow within the BCP, and satisfactory service levels from the passenger's perspective. The authors propose a methodology that relies on a multi-stage and multi-level graph structure of the BCP. It enables the implementation of alternative technological solutions supporting border control, i.e., Manual Border Control (MBC), and automated solutions such as e-Gates (e-Gs) and Self-Service Kiosks (SSKs) to create a complex BCP structure. Unlike traditional approach, in this research both static and dynamic phenomena of traffic flow modeling, allowing for comprehensive control of passenger movement at the BCPs, is proposed. The research integrates traffic control, the composition of technical resources, staffing considerations, and spatial analysis into a single evaluative framework, providing a methodology to find the compromise solution for the process design. It consists of six stages: 1) analysis of the current state, 2) design of process variants and formalisation of evaluation criteria, 3) simulation models development for variants, 4) simulation of the current state and process variants, and analysis of results, 5) selection and application of the decision aiding method to find the compromise variant, and 6) result analysis. The proposed methodology has been applied to redesign the border control process at an airport terminal in the context of new border control procedures. Assuming that 39% of passengers require 10–120% more processing time due to new procedures, the recommended process includes new equipment configuration, increasing the total number of units by two. At the same time, the number of border guards remains unchanged, and the space required for passengers waiting in the queues is reduced by 30%.
EN
This paper deals with an issue of technical facilities location in a public transport system. The decision problem is formulated as a selection of the most advantageous alternative, i.e. the location of a new tram depot among the already existing facilities of this type. The selection is preceded by the evaluation of the alternatives. The assessment is not a trivial task, because there are many groups of interest with usually contradictory points of view. Therefore, the evaluation of the new tram depot locations should represent different aspects, e.g., economical, technical, environmental, and organizational. To handle such a complex decision problem the authors propose a methodology, which is a composition of the optimisation and multiple criteria evaluation techniques. The developed methodology is experimentally applied to the selection of one out of five tram depot locations in the public transport system of the city of Poznan, Poland. All the computational experiments are performed by means of optimization and multiple criteria decision aiding (MCDA) methods and tools, i.e. a linear optimization engine Solver Premium Platform and AHP method with its application AHORNsimple. The calculations are the basis for recommending the location of a new depot in the central part of the transport system network, which is a reasonable solution taking into account, e.g. the proximity of the main railway line, the possibility of triple distribution of the transport means from depot. The proposed methodology of the decision problem solution gives also an opportunity to create the hierarchy of considered tram depot locations as well as to compare the position in the ranking of the best solution with the existing one. Since the proposed methodology assumes the selection of the most suitable MCDA method to the problem under consideration and the decision maker’s preferences, it guarantees that the result of analysis becomes reliable and the decision aiding process is credible.
first rewind previous Strona / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.