Measuring timetable robustness is a complex task. Previous efforts have mainly been focused on simulation studies or measurements of time supplements. However, these measurements don't capture the production flexibility of a timetable, which is essential for measuring the robustness with regard to the trains' commercial activity commitments, and also for merging the goals of robustness and efficiency. In this article we differentiate between production timetables and delivery timetables. A production timetable contains all stops, meetings and switch crossings, while a delivery timetable only contains stops for commercial activities. If a production timetable is constructed such that it can easily be replanned to cope with delays without breaking any commercial activity commitments it provides delivery robustness without compromising travel efficiency. Changing meeting locations is one of the replanning tools available during operation, and this paper presents a new framework for heuristically optimising a given production timetable with regard to the number of alternative meeting locations. Mixed integer programming is used to find two delivery feasible production solutions, one early and one late. The area between the two solutions represents alternative meeting locations and therefore also the replanning enabled robustness. A case study from Sweden demonstrates how the method can be used to develop better production timetables.

Robustness, replanning, train timetable