Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
1407
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Districts
Mergangsan
Gondomanan
Danurejan
Kraton
Umbulharjo
Pakualaman
Ngampilan
Gondokusuman
Mantrijeron
Kotagede
Tegalrejo
Wirobrajan
Gedongtengen
Jetis
Total
III.
B.
Temporal Distribution
People do their activities in different time within a day.
This temporal distribution is also found in the public transport
usage. Most of the public transport trips are distributed within
peak hours where 33.95% is made during morning peak hours
at 06.00-08.00 AM and 40.90% during afternoon peaks at
13.00-17.00 PM. Temporal trip distribution follows same
pattern for all trip purposes. Figure 2 shows temporal
distribution for total trips whereas the distribution for each trip
purpose is shown in Fig. 3
Number of
samples
40
30
34
34
74
30
30
69
41
37
44
30
30
31
554
TRIP CHARACTERISTICS
A.
Trip Purpose
Classification of trips according to its purpose is important
to be carried out since people do the travels for various
reasons [4]. In this research, among 863 trips generated by 554
surveyed households, most of the trips (329 trips, 38.12%) are
home based school trip where either origin or destination of
the trip maker is home or school. Home based shopping, work
and university are as many as 170, 163 and 148 trips or
1408
A.
Income
Fig. 4 shows the relationship between trip makers income
and the average trip. In general, the trip rate declines with the
increasing income of the trip makers. The highest trip rate is
made by travelers with no income with average 1.24 trips.
This value decreases to 0.33 for trip makers with income
between 0 to Rp. 1 million and continue to decline with
increasing trip makers income.
D.
Car Ownership
Relationship between car ownership and average trip
conducted by households also shows similar trend with that of
motorcycle. The average household trip decreases with the
increasing of number of car owned by it. There are 1.60 public
transport trips per household made by household with no car
ownership. This value declines to 1.30 trips on household with
1 car and continues to decrease as number of car increases.
Fig. 7 shows the relationship between average trip and car
ownership.
B.
Family Size
Family size tends to give positive relationship with
average trip. The highest average trip is committed by
household with 10 family members. The number of average
trip declines with reducing the number of family members in
household. Fig. 5 depicts the relationship between average trip
and family size.
V.
ANALYZING TRIP GENERATION
Trip generation can be divided into two parts [5]. The first
model is trip production model which provides relationship
between socioeconomic attributes and number of trip
generated from a zone. Another model concerns with
relationship between socioeconomic attributes and trip
attracted to a zone which known as trip attraction model.
Fig. 5 Relationship between family size and average trip
C. Motorcycle Ownership
The survey results show that motorcycle ownership
reduces the average number of trip committed by household.
The highest rate (1.74 trips) is made by household with no
motorcycle ownership. This value tends to decrease as the
A.
Trip Production Model
There are several independent variable candidates which
will be used in trip generation model. These variables were
further tested to see their correlation with trip number as
dependent variable. Those independent variables are
population, car ownership, motorcycle ownership, household
income, employee rate, student rate and accessibility of buses.
1409
i.
j.
1410
VII.
CONCLUSIONS
This study aims to develop trip generation model for
public transport passenger in Yogyakarta by using multiple
linear regression analysis. The analysis was based on the
household survey and some conclusions can be drawn as
follows:
a. Public transportation trip seems to have negative
correlation with income, motorcycle ownership and car
ownership. It means that the number of trip made by the
people decreases with the increasing in income, the
number of motorcycle and car owned. It is different with
the general trip generation model (the trip is modeled for
all trip either private or public transportation) where the
number of trip commonly rises with the increasing of
income, motorcycle and car ownership.
b. The number of public transport trip is increase with the
increasing of the number of family size. Commonly, the
higher is the number of family member; more public
transport trips will be conducted.
c. The application of the model to shelter evaluation shows
that the location of current shelters does not appropriate to
accommodate the demand in each district. Some of the
districts which have relatively high demand, such as
Tegal Rejo and Wirobrajan, are not served by enough
shelters.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors express gratitude their sincere thanks to the
Senior Vice Rector for Administration Gadjah Mada
University for their support to conduct the study and to
finance the presentation of this paper. Thank is also extended
to colleagues in Transport Laboratory, Dept. of Civil and
Environmental Engineering Gadjah Mada University,
Yogyakarta Indonesia.
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
1411