DY-RT: A Tool for Schedule-Based Planning of Regional Transit Networks

  • U. Crisalli
  • L. Rosati
Part of the Operations Research/Computer Science Interfaces Series book series (ORCS, volume 28)


This paper describes a decision support system (DSS) for the design and evaluation of service integrated systems (bus-bus and/or railway-bus) at regional scale. The modelling system has been built through a “what if” approach by using a system of schedule-based supply, demand and demand-supply interaction models; these models have been implemented in a software tool called DY-RT (DYnamic Regional Transit). The use of a within-day dynamic schedule-based approach allows us to evaluate on-board flows and level of service attributes (especially interchange times) for each run of each line, in order to assess in a more detailed way the effect of service integration and timetable synchronisation for regional transit networks, as described in the application examples reported in the final part of the paper.


Decision Support System Assignment Model Transit Network Design Scenario Transit Service 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Ben-Akiva, M., and Lerman, S. (1985) Discrete choice analysis, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Carraresi, P., Maluccelli, F., and Pallottino, S. (1996) Regional Mass Transit Assignment with resource constraints. Transportation Research, 30B, 81–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Cascetta, E. (2001) Transportation systems engineering: theory and methods. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Cascetta, E., Biggiero, L., Nuzzolo, A., and Russo, F. (1996) A System of Within-Day Dynamic Demand and Assignment Models for Scheduled Intercity Services. Proceedings of 24th European Transportation Forum Seminar D-E, London, England.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Florian, M. (1998) Deterministic time table transit assignment. Preprints of PTRC seminar on National models, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    INRO (1999) Documentation of EMME/2 release 9,
  7. [7]
    Moller-Pedersen, J. (1999) Assignment model for timetable based systems (TPSCHEDULE). Proceedings of 27th European Transportation Forum, Seminar F, Cambridge, England.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    NET Engineering (2001) S.F.M.R. - Il sistema ferroviario metropolitano regionale dell’area centrale veneta. Sintesi degli studi e del progetto.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Nguyen, S., and Pallottino, S. (1988) Equilibration Traffic Assignment for Large Scale Transit Networks. European Journal of Operational Research, 37, 176–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Nguyen, S., Pallottino, S. and Malucelli, F. (2001) A modeling framework for the passenger assignment on a transport network with time-tables. Transportation Science, 35, 238–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Nielsen, O.A., Hansen, C.O. and Daly, A. (2001) A large-scale model system for the Copenhagen-Ringsted railway project, in Travel behaviour research. The leading edge, D. Hensher ( Ed. ), Pergamon, 603–626.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Nuzzolo, A., and Russo, F. (1994) Departure time and path choice models for intercity transit assignment. Proceedings of 7th IATBR Conference, Valle Nevado, Cile.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Nuzzolo, A., Crisalli, U., and Gangemi, F. (2000) A behavioural choice model for the evaluation of railway supply and pricing policies. Transportation Research, 35A, 21 1226.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Nuzzolo, A., Russo, F., and Crisalli, U. (2002) Transit network modelling. The schedule-based dynamic approach, Collana Trasporti, Franco Angeli ( Ed. ), Milan, Italy.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Nuzzolo, A., and Crisalli, U. (2003) The schedule-based approach in dynamic transit modelling: a general overview. Proceedings of 1st Workshop on the Schedule-Based approach in Dynamic Transit Modelling, Elsevier.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    PTV-AG (2002) VISUM,
  17. [17]
    Spiess, H., and Florian, M. (1989) Optimal strategies: a new assignment model for transit networks. Transportation Research, 23B, 83–102.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • U. Crisalli
    • 1
  • L. Rosati
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil Engineering“Tor Vergata” University of RomaRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations