1 / 15

What is NCRST

What is NCRST. Funded under TEA-21, 1998 US DOT: Research & Special Programs Administration Philosophy: rapid evolution of research into commercial products, practice User consultation and outreach Partnerships: industry, international. The NCRSTs. Environment — Mississippi State

jillian-bauer
Download Presentation

What is NCRST

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What is NCRST • Funded under TEA-21, 1998 • US DOT: Research & Special Programs Administration • Philosophy: rapid evolution of research into commercial products, practice • User consultation and outreach • Partnerships: industry, international

  2. The NCRSTs • Environment — Mississippi State • Chuck O’Hara • Infrastructure — UC Santa Barbara • Raad Saleh (Wisconsin) • Flows — Ohio State • Charles Toth • Disasters — New Mexico • Demin Xiong (Oak Ridge) • 9 Technology Application Partners • Chris Chiesa (Veridian)

  3. NCRST Interest in Centerlines • 3 of 4 consortia have centerline extraction projects • 2 of 9 TAPs are focused on centerline extraction

  4. UCSB Interest in Centerlines • 1970-90 Tobler, Church, Goodchild, etc • Funded by Caltrans, USDOT-FHWA since early 1990s: towards IVHS/ITS models • Modeling of geometric error • GPS, wireless communication • Map rectification • NCRST: remote sensing • ESRI: essential data model for transportation

  5. Why CLEM2001? • Centerlines widely studied • Diverse approaches, each successful in particular domain • To become common practice: • understand niche of each method • faster, cheaper, more accurate • rural vs urban areas • exposed vs canopy, etc • consolidate techniques

  6. Some Centerline Applications • Precision snow plowing ± 0.2 m • ITS messaging … mayday ± 0.1-20 m • Toll by road/lane use ± 2 m • Highway asset management ± 15 m • Elections: right topology • Market research: who uses BrandX toothpaste: ± 500 m

  7. Some Criteria • Cost • Timeliness • Errant counties fail to report • Disaster response • Accuracy • Scope • Neighborhood vs city vs global

  8. Easy Street • New neighborhood • Little or no foliage overhang • Vehicles in garage/driveway

  9. Not so easy • Repairs and surface coats • Paint stripes • Shadows • Parked vehicles • Foliage overhangs

  10. Conclusion • One solution is not necessarily better than the others across all criteria — each has its niche • CLEM2001 is an opportunity to learn from each other

  11. Agenda Structure — Monday • View from the data producers • Don Cooke, GDT — accuracy • Bob LaMacchia, Census — beyond TIGER • Introductory survey of techniques • Raad Saleh

  12. Agenda Structure — Monday • Image analysis techniques • Ed Granzow, Iguana • Demin Xiong, Oak Ridge • Dar Roberts, UCSB • Chris Funk, UCSB • Chris Chiesa, Veridian • Peter Gipps, Quantm

  13. Agenda Structure — Tuesday • GPS/ITS techniques • Christopher Bennett, Montgomery Watson • Charles Toth, Ohio State • Russ Shields, Ygomi • GPS/Photogrammetry demo • Ted Jones/Gay Hamilton Smith, Florida DOT/HSA Consulting

  14. Agenda Structure — Tuesday • Data modeling • Kai Han, U/Manitoba • Terry Bills, GIS/Trans • Kevin Curtin, UCSB • What have we learned, where next (CLEM200x)? • Mike Goodchild, UCSB

More Related