Cross-Cutting and Specialty Vehicle Platform: Progress

1. Cross-Cutting and Specialty Vehicle Platform: Progress Annual Meeting ITS America Minneapolis, Minnesota May 21, 2003 Bob Ferlis Federal Highway Administration

2. Areas of Discussion • Road Departure Crash Countermeasures: • Intelligent Snow Plow (Minnesota DOT) • Intersection Crash Countermeasures: • Infrastructure Intersection Collision Avoidance (Infrastructure Consortium)

3. Road Departure Crash Countermeasures

4. Minnesota DOT Field Operational Test • Objective:Develop intelligent systems to improve safety and efficiency of snow plows, ambulances, and patrol squads • Projects: • Integrate multiple driver-assisting technologies on snow plows and conduct field operational test in Minnesota (MnDOT) • Evaluate results of MnDOT field operational test (Battelle)

5. Project Activities • Field Operational Test: • Detailed Design Report for major systems • Human factors field testing in support of driver interface design • Equipment installation on snow plows, police car, and ambulance • Installation of GPS base stations and weather stations • Testing between December 2001 and March 2002 • Evaluation of Field Operational Test • Evaluation plan guided effort

6. Intelligent Snow Plow

7. Lane Keeping Systems

8. Test Results • Results: • Intelligent vehicles were operated under actual storm conditions throughout the winters of 2002 and 2003 • Relatively light winters prevented a full test of their capabilities • Next Steps: • Technology incorporated into lane assistance system for transit buses in Minneapolis • Further development on snow plow platform expected in upper Minnesota

9. Intersection Crash Countermeasures

10. IVI Strategy for Intersection Collision Avoidance • Continue research and development of vehicle-only approaches • Begin research and development of infrastructure-based approaches • Ensure coordination of efforts • Support partnerships with infrastructure-providers and vehicle manufacturers • Support early field tests of concepts

11. Infrastructure Consortium • Partnership of three states, their universities, and FHWA • Purpose to develop and evaluate innovative intersection collision avoidance systems • Project will develop requirements and prove feasibility by Fall 2004 • Majority of work by academic and industry partners of IC member states • Approximately 40% completed

12. Work Plan • Task A – Delineate crash problem • Task B – Develop top-level requirements • Task C – Target crashes • Task D – Countermeasure trade-offs • Task E – Develop detailed requirements • Task F – Conduct enabling research • Task G – System design • Task H – Experiments • Task I – Plan Field Operational Test • Task M – Support early demonstration

13. Problem Scenarios • Envisions development of distinct systems in each of IC member states: • MN: infrastructure-only rural stop sign gap acceptance • VA: traffic signal violation • CA: left-turn assistance at urban signals

14. Demonstration • Provide opportunity for analysis of early intersection collision avoidance concepts by US DOT • Provide opportunity to inform technical experts and general public of progress made and plans for future • Conduct demo at TFHRC, McLean, VA, in June 2003

15. Close-up view with sight lines

16. Scenarios for Demonstration • Signal - SCP: Warning of potential signal violation (infrastructure-only and infrastructure-vehicle cooperative) • Signal - LTAP/OD: Warning of potential conflict with hidden vehicle • Stop sign – LTAP/LD: Provision of assistance for safe gap acceptance

17. California Scenario

18. Features of California Approach • Problem is gap decision for left-turning vehicle in presence of oncoming vehicles • For all traffic control devices: signal, stop sign, no controls • High potential for initial DII application • Takes advantage of left turn dynamics • If designed correctly, DII for left turn driver is unambiguous • DII located at far side corner, where driver likely to scan • Cooperative (wireless) systems may enhance system

19. California Demo: LTAP/OD

20. Minnesota Scenario

21. Minnesota - Addressing Rural Intersection Safety • The primary problem at rural intersections involves a driver on the minor road selecting a safe gap in the major road traffic stream. • Study of 1604 rural intersections • 2-lane roadways, Thru/STOP intersection control only, no medians over 2+ year period, Source: Howard Preston, Howard R. Green Co.

22. Low speed vehicle Approaches and stops. High Speed vehicle Approaches intersection DII Radar Sensor DII provides Gap information

23. APPROACHING VEHICLE

24. Virginia Scenario

25. Virginia - Cooperative System Diagram Wireless Antenna Radar/Sensors DII Signal Controller Embedded PC

26. GIS map database??? Positioning system Data integration & processing system (includes RT, velocity, etc.) Receiver for signal data stream ICAV DVI Data stream from signal with phase and timing information (provided by IC)

27. A Cooperative Solution to SCP Crash

28. For additional information, please contact me: Robert A. Ferlis Team Leader, Enabling Technologies Team Operations R&D, RD & T Federal Highway Administration, HRDO McLean, Virginia 22101 202-493-3268 robert.ferlis@fhwa.dot.gov