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