Active and Passive Bus Priority Strategies in Mixed Traffic Arterials Controlled by SCOOT Adaptive Signal System

In recent years, bus priority techniques for signals controlled by traffic management centers have become a viable alternative to reduce passenger delays at signalized intersections, especially in mixed traffic corridors. However, before any bus signal priority strategy is deployed in such corridors, the impacts on the different users of the system should be evaluated. The main objective of this work was to assess the operational performance of passive and active bus priority techniques in fixed and real-time signal systems of one of the main arterial corridors in Fortaleza, Brazil. As a secondary objective, it also evaluated the operational benefits of a SCOOT adaptive signal control system, comparing it with well-adjusted fixed-time plans optimized by TRANSYT, for periods of medium and high traffic volumes. In the evaluation of alternative scenarios, the following performance measures were considered: vehicle delay and number of stops simulated by SCOOT, as well as bus and automobile travel times observed in the field during the operation of each scenario. The results did not favor the adoption of passive and active priority schemes in the studied corridor; this led to the conclusion that SCOOT's real-time control, programmed for a good signal progression of the general traffic (buses and automobiles), is the best signal control strategy for an arterial corridor similar to the one under analysis.

[1]  Laurence R. Rilett,et al.  Improved Transit Signal Priority System for Networks with Nearside Bus Stops , 2005 .

[2]  William R McShane,et al.  Evaluation of Transit Signal Priority and Optimal Signal Timing Plans in Transit and Traffic Operations , 2007 .

[3]  K Wood,et al.  BUS TRANSYT - A USER'S GUIDE , 1977 .

[4]  K Wood.  URBAN TRAFFIC CONTROL : SYSTEMS REVIEW , 1993 .

[5]  Peter G Furth,et al.  Transit Signal Priority Along Arterials Using Advanced Detection , 2003 .

[6]  Carlos Felipe G. Loureiro,et al.  Managing Congestion in Large Brazilian Urban Area through Logical Interface between SCOOT and GIS Platform , 2009 .

[7]  Guohui Zhang,et al.  Comprehensive Evaluation of a Transit Signal Priority System Using Observed and Simulated Traffic Data , 2008 .

[8]  S. Travis Waller,et al.  Modeling Approach for Transit Signal Preemption , 2002 .

[9]  Peter T Martin,et al.  BUS PRIORITY OF SCOOT EVALUATED IN A VISSIM SIMULATION ENVIRONMENT , 2003 .

[10]  Vincent,et al.  BUS PRIORITY IN A NETWORK OF FIXED TIME SIGNALS , 1974 .

[11]  Francois Dion,et al.  Evaluation of Service Reliability Impacts of Traffic Signal Priority Strategies for Bus Transit , 2003 .

[12]  Yihua Zhang.  An Evaluation of Transit signal Priority and SCOOT Adaptive Signal control , 2001 .

[13]  Alexander Skabardonis,et al.  Control Strategies for Transit Priority , 1998 .

[14]  Kevin N. Balke,et al.  Development and Evaluation of Intelligent Bus Priority Concept , 2000 .

[15]  Alexander Skabardonis,et al.  Optimal Detector Location for Bus Signal Priority , 2004 .

[16]  Robert L. Bertini,et al.  Analysis of Transit Signal Priority Using Archived TriMet Bus Dispatch System Data , 2005 .

[17]  Simon J. Shepherd,et al.  INTEGRATED ATT STRATEGIES FOR URBAN ARTERIALS: DRIVE II PROJECT PRIMAVERA: 2. BUS PRIORITY IN SCOOT AND SPOT USING TIRIS , 1995 .

[18]  Peter G Furth,et al.  Bus Priority with Highly Interruptible Traffic Signal Control: Simulation of San Juan’s Avenida Ponce de Leon , 2002 .

[19]  Chen-Fu Liao,et al.  Simulation Study of Bus Signal Priority Strategy , 2007 .

[20]  Hesham A Rakha,et al.  Evaluation of Potential Transit Signal Priority Benefits along a Fixed-Time Signalized Arterial , 2004 .

[21]  Thomas Urbanik,et al.  MODEL TO EVALUATE THE IMPACTS OF BUS PRIORITY ON SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS , 1994 .

[22]  Cfg Loureiro,et al.  GIS DATABASE/INTERFACE FOR URBAN TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT IN BRAZIL , 1999 .