1 / 32

University of Maryland November 23, 2009

Use of Bluetooth as Anonymous Traffic Probes ------------------- Technical Characteristics and Application Potential. University of Maryland November 23, 2009. Travel time is increasingly the performance measure of choice Freeways & arterials are equally significant

karis
Download Presentation

University of Maryland November 23, 2009

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. Use of Bluetooth as Anonymous Traffic Probes-------------------Technical Characteristics and Application Potential University of MarylandNovember 23, 2009

  2. Travel time is increasingly the performance measure of choice Freeways & arterials are equally significant Required by transportation re-authorization Speed detectors alone are not sufficient to provide accurate travel times. What you can’t measure you can’t manage Traffic Monitoring & Management

  3. What is Bluetooth? • IEEE Wireless Data Communication Standard • License Free Spectrum - ~2.4GHz • Cable Replacement Technology • Ubiquitous – worldwide proliferation • Where is it found? • Cell phones / PDAs / PNDs / MP3 players • Laptops / Games / Cameras • Essential characteristics • Three power ranges 100m / 10m / 1m • Anonymous ID / Privacy Protection / Voluntary • Approximately 1 in 20 sampling rate

  4. Bluetooth Traffic Monitoring Bluetooth Signal * Time = 8:03:26 AM Bluetooth Sensors 2 miles Travel Time = 2:32 MinutesSpeed = 51.7 MPH Time = 8:05:58 AM * Bluetooth signals come from cell phones, PDAs, laptops, GPS, car radios… ** Provisional patent received 4 9/19/2014

  5. Data from many cars … 40 One Car’s Data 35 30 25 Travel Time - Minutes 20 15 10 5 0 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Time of Day Actual Travel Time Data from I-95 Northbound on April 2

  6. Data from many cars … 40 35 30 25 Travel Time - Minutes 20 15 10 5 0 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Time of Day Actual Travel Time Data from I-95 Northbound on April 2

  7. Bluetooth Detection Range 300 ft radius

  8. Typical Temporary Deployment

  9. Conventional GPS Fleet Cell Phone Toll Tag Detectors Tracking Geolocation Tracking Bluetooth Traffic Monitoring Advantages Privacy guarantees  Accuracy of Travel Time measurement  Quality of Arterial Data  Coverage for all roadways and times of day

  10. Privacy and Legal Issues • Bluetooth IDs inherently anonymous • No user account information • Compliant to IEEE standards • No packet sniffing • Federal Rules and State Legislation • FCC anti-eaves dropping rules • State legislation against use of personal data

  11. Comparison with ATR at US29 • Detection Volumes • Speed Accuracy

  12. Comparison with ATRs

  13. Comparison with Toll Tag • I-80 SanFrancisco • 1.41 mile segment between existing toll gantries • March 10-27th

  14. Comparison with Toll Tags

  15. Detection Rates • Types of detection rates • Station detection – % seen at sensor • Segment detection - % of matched pairs • Observed detection rates • I95 Vehicle Probe Project --- 1.5% to 7%, most 2-3% • Purdue University • 7 -10% sensor detection rate along arterials • Maryland SHA on US29 at ATR • 2.8% to 3.0% segment detection / 4.1% to 7.8% station detection • Freeways in Australia ~10%

  16. Testing and Demos • I-95 Vehicle Probe Validation • Assessment of signal timing on arterials • Urban arterials, DC Demo on July 4th • Freeway Interchange Assessment

  17. Validation of Vehicle Probe

  18. Main line speeds Speeds associated with weight station

  19. Arterial Assessment • MD24 in Northern Baltimore • Before/After impact of signal timing • AM, Mid-day, and PM analysis • February 23-27, 2009 • New timing on 2/25/09

  20. Results PM Comparison

  21. Purdue Results • SR37 Instrumented Corridor • Bluetooth Identified Saturday timing problem

  22. CDF Plots of Before / After

  23. Washington DC Demo • Sensors placed along Georgia Avenue / 7th Street Corridor • 7th and Indiana Ave • 7th and F Street • 7th and K Street • 7th and S Street • Data collected from • 7PM, Thursday, July 2 • 7AM, Sunday, July 5

  24. Spike in traffic due to exodus from fireworks display

  25. DC Travel Time Data

  26. DRAFT 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 18 21 24 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 3 6 9 12 Travel Time for segment C38-C6E 7th - F Street to Indiana Ave Travel Time Data Outliers Other Travel Time - Minutes Pedestrians Vehicles Hour of day from 02-Jul-2009 to 05-Jul-2009

  27. INTERCHANGE TURNING MOVEMENTS I-695 & I-95 BLUETOOTH INSTRUMENTATION

  28. ALL 12 TURNING MOVEMENTS CAPTURED!!! DETECTIONS

  29. Conclusion • Technical Characteristics • Accurate travel time measures • Detection rates 2 to 7% • Portable and easily deployable • Applications & Environments • Freeway & Arterial Travel Time • Effective analysis tool for signal timing • Real-time applications are coming

  30. Questions?

More Related