SPaT Challenge Webinar Series Webinar #9: Operational SPaT - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

SPaT Challenge Webinar Series Webinar #9: Operational SPaT Deployments 2:00 – 3:30 PM (Eastern) | October 23, 2018

Webinar Logistics • All lines are muted • Webinar will be recorded • Submit questions and comments in chat or Q&A section of webinar window • Questions will be answered at webinar conclusion 2

Agenda • Welcome, Introduction, and Updates  Blaine Leonard, Utah DOT • Operational SPaT Deployments  Mohd Aslami, North Carolina DOT  Alan Davis, Georgia DOT • Q&A 3

SPaT Challenge To challenge state and local public sector transportation infrastructure owners and operators (IOOs) to deploy DSRC infrastructure with SPaT (and MAP) broadcasts in at least one corridor or network (approximately 20 signalized intersections) in each state by January 2020 20 intersections in 50 states by 2020! 2 1/2 years of progress: 39 Locations 26 States 500 RSUs Operating 2360 RSUs Planned 4

SPaT Challenge Website https://transportationops.org/spatchallenge 5

SPaT Challenge Webinars to Date https://transportationops.org/spatchallenge/webinarseries • Eight webinars conducted to date  Recordings available in full or by topic on SPaT Challenge website 1. Initial SPaT Challenge Activities (March 6)  SPaT Challenge introduction  Systems Engineering Approach  Overview of Model Concept of Operations and Requirements documents  Costs, Procurement, and Corridor Selection 6

SPaT Challenge Webinars to Date https://transportationops.org/spatchallenge/webinarseries 2. Design Considerations, Part 1 (March 20)  SPaT Messages, Data Assembly, and the Signal Controller Interface  V2I Hub Overview  Agency experience with deploying on-board units 3. Design Considerations, Part 2 (April 17)  Overview of MAP Messages  Utah DOT’s MAP Message Creation Approach  Vehicle Position Correction Need and Solutions 7

SPaT Challenge Webinars to Date https://transportationops.org/spatchallenge/webinarseries 4. MAP Creator Tool Demonstration (April 24)  USDOT MAP Creator Tool (Leidos / Saxton Lab)  Information about accessing/using the Tool 5. Design Considerations, Part 3 (May 15)  RSU Specification v4.1  Roadside Equipment & Backhaul Communications  DSRC Licensing 6. Deployment and Validation (June 12)  Security Credential Management  Verifying SPaT Deployments’ Compatibility with Vehicles  Michigan DOT Completed SPaT Deployment Verification  USDOT CAV Support Services 8

SPaT Challenge Webinars to Date https://transportationops.org/spatchallenge/webinarseries 7. Operational SPaT Deployments (July 17)  Las Vegas  Virginia DOT  Utah DOT 8. SPaT Challenge Next Steps (August 14)  Operational SPaT Deployments in Pennsylvania  Connected Fleet Challenge  Equipping Transit Fleet Vehicles with OBUs in Utah 9

SPaT Challenge Website https://transportationops.org/spatchallenge 10

SPaT Challenge Resource Page https://transportationops.org/spatchallenge/resources 11

Upcoming SPaT Challenge Webinar • Operational SPaT Deployments  January 22, 2019: 2:00 – 3:30pm Eastern  Register and find more information at: https://transportationops.org/spatchallenge/webinars eries 12

SPaT Challenge The basis of the SPaT Challenge is to broadcast:  SPaT Message  MAP Message Using DSRC technologies. Subsequent efforts could include:  Broadcast a Security Certificate (SCMS)  Broadcast a GPS Correction Message (RTCM)  Install OBUs in vehicles (Fleet Challenge)  Implement V2I Applications 13

SCMS Systems Webinar 6 included a presentation on SCMS systems, functions and needs  Trust is the key element of SCMS  Recommended that we implement certificate systems sooner, rather than later USDOT led the creation of the SCMS Proof-of- Concept system to support CV Pilots  Proof-of-Concept system not suitable to scale up for national deployment  No overall policy framework / No misbehavior detection 14

SCMS Systems FHWA recently held two workshops to develop strategies for deploying a full-scale SCMS system  Governance and Oversight  High-level Policies  Roles and Responsibilities  Business and Financial Models A National SCMS System is not imminent 15

SCMS Systems The current landscape:  CV Pilot sites are using a private certificate provider  GM (Cadillac) has a certificate system for their models  Some agencies are exploring certificates through private providers These workable and available solutions are not the same as a complete national SCMS system 16

Federal AV Guidance New guidance for automated vehicles (ver 3.0) released in September  Increases focus on other modes  Reiterates that connectivity (V2V and V2X) is a complementary technology that will enhance automation  SPaT Challenge is mentioned  USDOT encourages continued deployment and use of the 5.9GHz spectrum but does not promote any specific technology 17

Operational SPaT Deployments

Q&A Submit questions and comments in chat or Q&A section of webinar window

Mobility Par tne r ships Safe ty State wide Conne c te d Ve hic le s Conne c te d Ve hic le s Depl eploy oyment E Expe perience e and and Fut uture P Plans ans Alan Davis, PE, PTOE F r e ight Assistant State Traffic Engineer

Pilot De ployme nt Obje c tive s • Primary goal: Develop back-end infrastructure, network components, and business processes to support broad vehicle to infrastructure applications that is broadcast-medium agnostic, scalable, and sustainable. • Secondary goal: Begin broad installation of roadside units and equipped vehicles to facilitate applications that improve safety and mobility. Primary Applic ication Spaces: Safety Mobility Freight Partnerships

Ac tive De ployme nts Phas hase 1: P Pilot – June une 2018 2018 • SR 141 (Peachtree) from SR 9 to I-285 • SR 8 (Ponce de Leon) from Peachtree to SR 42 • 54 traffic signals • 12 ramp meters • Signal Phasing and Timing (SPaT) • Red light warning • Pedestrian in signalized crosswalk • Phase termination/next signal phase • Green-band speed

HTTPS HTTPS/ JSON /WS GDOT CV Ar c hite c tur e Signal Open Data Central API System HTTPS HTTPS/ /WS WS NTCIP 1201 1202 1211 • CV Application resides on signal controller ATC Signal CV App DSRC Controller Radio • No additional hardware (outside of RSU) required SAEJ2735 • Open access to third parties SAEJ2735 • Controller can handle application SPaT MAP • Signal priority BSM BIM TIM

Multiple Br oa dc a st Cha nne ls Intersection 3 Intersection 2 Intersection 1 Intersection 4 No DSRC DSRC Installed No DSRC DSRC Installed Third Party Service Car 1: Non-connected Car 2: Cellular Car 3: 5.9 GHz DSRC vehicle connected vehicle connected vehicle

Phase 1 SPaTApplic ations Safety for drivers – alerts of Red light warning inability to safely clear intersection Safety for drivers and pedestrians – Pedestrian in crosswalk turning vehicles have additional awareness of other users Efficiency for drivers – alert drivers Phase service remaining for safe intersection passage or efficient stopping Efficiency for drivers – inform Green speed for drivers of the optimal driving speed coordinated signals through coordinated signals to minimize stops ACTIVE DSRC IN METRO ATLANTA •SR 141 (Peachtree) – 39 intersections • North Ave – 22 intersections •SR 8 (Ponce de Leon) – 15 intersections (Renew) Increased Aggregated data awareness Real-time signal phasing analytics for increased improving and timing information route efficiency safety and mobility

De ployme nt

De ployme nt

De ployme nt

De ployme nt

Intersection name Phase Debug service information remaining Minimum speed required to clear green Vehicle speed

Red light running warning

Validation and T e sting • Properly formatted, J2735-compliant messages • Ingress lanes that include a ConnectsTo but that egress lane is not defined (or is not defined as an egress) • Ingress lanes that do not include a ConnectsTo • Ingress lanes that do not include a signal phase/approachId • Incorrect or missing ingress/egress definitions for each approach • Overlap/underlap of lanes and widths • Incorrect ‘ConnectsTo’ lanes • General layout and structure of lane paths/geometries • Signal phases being reported as “dark” or “unavailable” • Correctness of the time remaining values • Inconsistency of the reported minTime and maxTime (ie. min greater than max) • Unexpected changes in minTime and maxTime • Accuracy of the reported phase vs the actual signal • Transmit rate of each message type

Pr oje c t Challe nge s • Device interoperability • Controller to RSU • RSU to OBU • OBU to OBU • MAP message creation and validation • Protected/permissive left turns • What’s a ramp meter? • Application deployments • Security credentialing • Data • Limited fleet • Regional communications network

Phase 2 De ployme nt • Communications Scalable Broad deployment • ATC Signal Deployment Controller potential in Strategy • DSRC Radio Georgia