Website
Header

  Efficient Transit Solutions                                                                                           Winter 2011       

Masdar PRT Opens
Peter J. Muller, P.E.
 
Masdar

On Sunday, November 28th, the Masdar PRT system opened to the public. To quote Larry Fabian, 2getthere, "The manufacturer, got there." 2getthere operates the system with the support of Singapore Mass Rapid Transit. Masdar City is a new carbon-free city being developed adjacent to Abu Dhabi in the UAE.

The system has 10 passenger and 3 freight vehicles serving 2 passenger and 3 freight stations connected by approximately one mile of track. The system is in operation 18 hours a day, seven days a week serving the Masdar Institute of Technology. Trips take about 2 and a half minutes and are presently free of charge. Average wait times are expected to be about 30 seconds.

Robbert Lohmann, Marketing Director for 2getthere, is quick to point out that the elaborate stations are not necessarily reflective of what a station should look like, but more an indication of what one could look like, if desired.

As mentioned previously, it is unlikely that this system will be extended throughout the entire Masdar City as originally planned. However, it is hoped it will be expanded beyond the extent of the present rather limited system.

Masdar PRT Station
Masdar PRT Station
  

The Heathrow PRT system recently achieved 99.6% availability during four weeks of passenger trials. We look forward to receiving availability results from Masdar. It will bode well for PRT if they are in a similar range. To put 99.6% in perspective, it means 4 trips in a thousand do not go as planned. This is six times more reliable than transit level of service A for transit reliability as defined in TRB's Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 100: Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual, where 25 trips per thousand are permitted to be late.

 

 

Personal Rapid Transit Capacity
Speed & Capacity

 

The burgeoning interest in personal rapid transit (PRT) in India is highlighting the issue of PRT capacity. This is a fairly complex topic that will be briefly dealt with here. Note: network capacity is much more complex than just the guideway capacity that is dealt with here. PRT capacity is complex because it is impacted by a number of issues:

 

Brick wall stopping (BWS) criteria. This is a railroad safety criterion that many believe not to be applicable to PRT. Basically BWS requires that a train must be able to stop before hitting a preceding train if that preceding train instantaneously turns into a stationary brick wall. In order to meet BWS the time between trains (or T-Pods in the case of PRT) must be adjusted based on speed and the maximum available, or allowable, deceleration.

 

Deceleration. The maximum deceleration is a function of the available friction and of whether passengers are standing or sitting, wearing seat belts, etc. The available friction or deceleration force varies with the type of PRT system. PRT systems driven and decelerated by linear induction motors rely on their motors for their primary breaking force and are typically independent of friction and thus weather. The maximum breaking deceleration they apply is typically less than what is available. Rubber-tired PRT systems, on the other hand, are dependent on the friction between their tires and the riding surface which can be dramatically impacted by weather. These systems will usually have weather mitigation plans aimed at maintaining friction above about 0.25G where G is the force of gravity.

 

Minimum headway. This is the minimum time between vehicles measured from the front of one vehicle to the front of the other. For BWS criteria, it varies from about 1.4 seconds with 0.50G deceleration force at 15 mph to about 3.2 seconds with 0.25G deceleration force at 30 mph. Without BWS criteria many suppliers claim they will achieve minimum headways of 0.5 seconds. Cabintaxi demonstrated 0.5 second PRT headways but never proved endurance or safety at these headways. We therefore believe it prudent to plan for minimum headways of no less than 1.0 seconds. Headway is strongly tied to capacity since reducing headway by half theoretically doubles capacity.

 

Occupancy. This is the number of passengers per T-pod. Occupancy is also strongly tied to capacity since doubling the occupancy theoretically doubles capacity. However increasing PRT occupancy during peak hours usually involves ride sharing. This can be easily accomplished on small systems with few stations but is difficult to accomplish on large systems with many stations. Imagine how long a passenger bound to station 57 in a 100 station system would have to wait for another to arrive also bound for station 57. Ride sharing protocols to overcome this problem will be the subject of a future article.

 

This table provides the theoretical guideway capacity in passengers per hour based on variations in the parameters discussed above. The reasonable capacity of PRT guideways is seen to range between about 1,000 and 14,000 passengers per hour. Since PRT systems tend to cost much less than other fixed guideway systems, it is usually useful to compare the costs required to meet the capacity demand.

other costs.   
 Peter Muller picture


 




  
Peter J. Muller, P.E.
President

Twitter  

  


In This Issue
Masdar PRT Opens
Personal Rapid Transit Capacity
Website Updates
Upcoming Conferences
Urban PRT Guideways


Website Updates

In addition to PRT news updates (which now occur almost daily) we have recently made the following additions:

>  New project videos are available for viewing:
 >  New pictures posted:  

Masdar City PRT Project   

 

>  Press release:

Sustainable Transit Enters Service in Sustainable City 

  
>  3 new blogs  

 Recently added:

>  Sustainable City Enabled by Personal Rapid Transit

New website



Upcoming Conferences

Feb 2011 · Denver, CO
  Visit PRT booth #7

 

March 2011 · Copenhagen
May 2011 · Paris   

Picture 
Quick Links

 

 

Urban Personal Rapid Transit Guideways

GuidewayCommunities considering retrofitting personal rapid transit (PRT) guideways in urban settings are finding this is not always easily accomplished. In most situations, it is logical for the guideways to be within existing street rights-of-way (ROW) and these are often cluttered/adorned with trees, overhead utility lines, street lights, traffic signals, signs, etc. In addition, the adjoining buildings often have little or no setback and can be significantly impacted by an elevated guideway in close proximity. To help highlight some of the opportunities and hurdles, we have developed a series of illustrations showing different potential guideway locations within an existing urban ROW. They conclude with some ideas for proposed (new) ROWs, highlighting the potential to reduce guideway visual intrusion, while taking advantage of the mobility offered by PRT to also reduce vehicle intrusion. The illustrations can be downloaded here. 

The final two sketches are dramatically different than the others and prompt the question: "Shouldn't this be the ultimate goal of PRT?" Visit this website to learn more about sustainable cities enabled by PRT.

PRT proponents often promote the concept of using the guideway infrastructure to support streetlights and eliminate the need for overhead utilities. This very logical concept may prove quite difficult to implement in practice. Utility companies presently resist hanging their utilities on each other's poles - a seemingly equally logical concept. 

If common use of the guideway structure is to be accomplished, it will be important that each entity using the structure can obtain unhindered access to their key elements, without hindering the functioning of the key elements of the other entities. Utility lines strung on the guideway structure above a suspended PRT system (such as Beamways, MISTER or SkyTran) may be almost inaccessible, without somehow reaching over the dynamic envelope reserved for moving T-Pods - a maneuver unlikely to pass the safety certification process.

Utilities strung under the guideway of a supported PRT system with the bogie captured within the guideway structure (such as Skyweb Express) might pose similar problems if the guideway covers had to be removed while working in close proximity to the energized utility lines. The best opportunity for PRT and utilities to coexist seems to lie with supported systems of the open guideway type (such as 2getthere, ULTra or Vectus). Such systems could allow almost all PRT maintenance to be accomplished by workers working above the guideway riding surface and almost all utility maintenance to be accomplished by workers working below the guideway riding surface. Thus the riding surface would form a well-defined natural boundary between the systems.

 

 

PRT Consulting, Inc.