WMATA Bus ITS Project Update Transit Signal Priority Briefing to the Traffic Signals and Operations Working Group April 21, 2005.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Development of Standards for Transit Priority Paul R. Olson, P.E. PTOE FHWA Western Resource Center.
Advertisements

Metro Transit INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS (ITS)
Bus Priority in Portland - Lessons Learned
Presented by: Chakman Choi, Baradhwaj Hariharan, Uday Sankar Kandolath Date: 4/3/07.
The Downtown Seattle Bus Monitoring System Collecting and Analyzing Transit Travel Time Data Owen Kehoe, PE, PTOE King County Metro Transit : Seattle,
Jeremy Siviter, IBI Group, Project Manager May 18th, 2011
Transit Signal Prioritization (TSP) Considerations within RTS Corridors Rapid Transit System Steering Committee Technical Memorandum 2 Existing Conditions.
T RANSPORTATION D ISADVANTAGED B EST P RACTICES & T RAINING W ORKSHOP “ Maximizing ITS investments to reduce operating costs and provide the best possible.
Introduction of FUTÁR System. Basic data of FUTÁR System Devices to be installed The investment cost of project: EUR Vehicle consolidated with.
Transit Signal Priority Applications New Technologies, New Opportunities Peter Koonce, PE APTA BRT Conference – Seattle, WA Wednesday, May 5, 2009 Technology.
AVONDALE ROAD ITS 2006 COUNTYWIDE GRANT. AVONDALE ROAD ITS OVERVIEW OVERVIEW Location Location Avondale Road between Novelty Hill Road and NE 132 nd St.
Presented by: SAGE KAMIYA, P.E., PTOE
Transit Signal Prioritization (TSP) and RTS RTS Steering Committee A Path to Successful Implementation 1 September 24, 2013.
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) Metro’s Countywide Signal Priority Program T3 Webinar January 22, 2008.
Transit Signal Priority Work Group Report 7/30/13
Electronic Fare Collection CEE582. Vehicle-Based Systems (Fixed-Route) Exterior Route and Destination Announcements Electronic Destination Sign Vehicle.
Advanced Public Transit Systems (APTS) Transit ITS CEE582.
Advanced Public Transit Systems (APTS) Transit ITS CEE582.
Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT)
Implementing the ITS Archive Data User Service in Portland, Oregon Robert L. Bertini Andrew M. Byrd Thareth Yin Portland State University IEEE 7 th Annual.
TSP Must Fit Within An Overall Agency ITS Plan. Transit Priority Data Needs Vehicle Location –Speed Door & Lift Status –Predictions Passenger Counting.
Month XX, 2004 Dr. Robert Bertini Using Archived Data to Measure Operational Benefits of ITS Investments: Ramp Meters Oregon Department of Transportation.
Transit Traveler Information CEE582. Fixed-Route Central ControlCustomer Information Wireless Data On-Off Load Data Radio/ Message and AVL Transmission.
APTS – Fourth Day Miscellaneous Topics. Fleet Management Fixed Route versus Paratransit Operations versus Maintenance.
ICM San Antonio – IH-10 Corridor Brian Fariello, TxDOT.
Center for Urban Transportation Research | University of South Florida Technology Session: 21 st Annual Transportation Disadvantaged Best Practices and.
Transit Priority Systems (TPS) Chun Wong, P.E. City of Los Angeles, Department of Transportation T3 Webinar.
King County Metro Long Range Public Transportation Plan Kirkland Transportation Commission_ April 10, 2015.
Evolving TSP to meet the needs of the ITS community 1.
Technology and Society The DynamIT project Dynamic information services and anonymous travel time registration VIKING Workshop København Per J.
Envisioned Role for NTI Concerning ITS Deployment in Egypt by Dr. Mahmoud EL-HADIDI Professor of Telecommunications at Cairo U & Consultant at NTI 3 rd.
Multi-Operator Transit Information for Operations and Planning Transit Service Information Portal (TSIP)
Role of the Highway-Rail Intersection in the National ITS Architecture IEEE WG14 June 20, 2000 Bruce Eisenhart Lockheed Martin Architecture Development.
Khaled Shammout 20 th Annual Transportation Disadvantaged July 31, 2012.
Overview of Transit Signal Priority Program in King County Prepared by Transit Signal Priority Unit.
WMATA BRT Marketing and Branding Presentation Rapid Transit Steering Committee April 30, 2013 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority.
Dixie Regional ITS Architecture Project Summary July 31, 2006.
Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Project Update TAC - July 21, 2015 Nick Perfili, FCDOT Department of Transportation.
Jump Starting ITS Deployment in Los Angeles County using Wireless Communications Lessons Learned.
Transit Priority Strategies for Multiple Routes under Headway-based Operations Shandong University, China & University of Maryland at College Park, USA.
NESTS Transit Planning Project Facilities and Technology Briefing with CAST of Cornell University and Creighton Manning Engineering, LLP.
TRB 88th Annual Meeting, Washington DC January, 2009 Huan Li and Robert L. Bertini Transportation Research Board 88th Annual Meeting Washington, DC January.
INTELLIGENT TRANSPORT SYSTEMS
Enhanced 511: Beyond the Basics Jerry Woods Florida DOT – District 5 iFlorida - Automated Message Generation Based on Travel Times.
U.S. DOT T3 Webinar Mobile Device Technology TCRP Synthesis 91 April 10, 2012 Case Study LeeTran – Lee County, FL Mike Horsting, AICP 1.
Intro to Network Design
Walter Kulyk, P.E. Director, Office of Mobility Innovation Federal Transit Administration Session 11: ITS Research in the U.S. and Abroad 2007 ITSA Annual.
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Overcoming Multi-Jurisdictional Challenges Lessons Learned Implementing Bus Signal Priority.
Transit Signal Priority (TSP). Problem: Transit vehicles are slow Problem: Transit vehicles are effected even more than cars by traffic lights –The number.
Transit Signal Priority (TSP): Deployment Issues and R&D Needs as Identified by Practitioners Hallie Smith Brendon Hemily.
ITS PCB T3 Webinar October 21, 2008 Montgomery County, Maryland Advanced Transportation Management System Automated Parking Information System Operational.
Open Transit Data: Meeting Customer Needs Or – Where the Data Meets the Road Dan Overgaard Supervisor, Systems Development & Operations King County Metro.
PRE-PROPOSAL MEETING RFTA Solicitation No Automated Vehicle Locator (AVL) & Computer-Aided Dispatch (CAD) System and Related Services.
1 Presented to the Transportation Planning Board October 15, 2008 Item 9 Metrobus Priority Corridor Network.
SAFENET The OSU SAFENET Project The Ohio State University Center for Automotive Research & Center for Intelligent Transportation Research.
“Building an Intelligent Transit Agency” Eva Lerner-Lam, President Palisades Group USA Presented at TRB 2002 Annual Meeting Monday, January 14, 2002.
Line 22 BRT: Summary Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority May 2003.
FlexBRT Project Briefing. Background Feasibility Study began in – $750,000 TEA-21 Grant to study an ITS Circulator in North Orange County/South.
Use of HITL in Bus Priority Design Kevin Balke, Ph.D., P.E. TransLink ® Research Center Director Texas Transportation Institute Hardware-in-the-Loop Symposium.
Transit Signal Priority: Managing Expectations Kevin N. Balke, Ph.D., P.E TransLink ® Research Center Director Texas Transportation Institute Transportation.
Express/Rapid Bus Opportunities for Priority Bus Transit in the Washington Region Sponsored by National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board Chun.
Overview of King County Transit Signal Priority Program T3 Webinar January 22, 2008.
Transit Signal Priority: The Importance of AVL Data David T. Crout Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (TriMet) Presented at Transportation.
REGIONAL STAKEHOLDER TWG KICKOFF WEBINAR MAY 4 1:30-3:30 PM Next Generation Transit Service Information Portal.
BIC 2013 National Conference Presented By: Tim Quinn, Executive Vice President Date: 27 October, 2013 Time: 15:00 to 16:00 Social Media, Accelerating IT.
GRTC Bus Rapid Transit Project July 17, Agenda 1.BRT Concept 2.Project Goals 3.Project Benefits 4.Project Corridor 5.Proposed Multimodal Access.
Arlington County’s Transit ITS Program Needs Assessment and Planning Study Presented to ITS Virginia | July 17, 2015.
March 10, 2010 Smart City Award: ITS America. Traffic Signal Systems in Oregon Significant application of adaptive control (100+ signals) Priority for.
Transit Technology Hampton Roads Transit. Hampton Roads Transit (HRT) provides public transportation for six cities in the South Hampton Roads region:
Presentation transcript:

WMATA Bus ITS Project Update Transit Signal Priority Briefing to the Traffic Signals and Operations Working Group April 21, 2005

Presentation Outline Signal Systems Matrix WMATA’s On-board Bus Systems Operational Concepts for TSP Priority/Preemption Detection Equipment Feedback

WMATA’s Goal for TSP Improve transit performance Reduced delay at traffic signals - >> increases speed - >> reduces person delay Reduced travel time variability - >> improves on-time performance - >> reduces bus bunching

WMATA’s Challenges Significant challenges related to the extent of WMATA’s service area Integration of AVL system and technical requirements of ITS system

WMATA’s Goal * Move beyond regional demonstrations * Washington DC Under design Montgomery County, MD Centralized Priority System Discontinued Fairfax County, VA Distributed System Operational Arlington County, VA Distributed System Operational testing

Resolution #1 Implementation requires cooperation Signal system must be able to handle a request  Responsibility of the traffic agency Buses need to be equipped with technology to submit a request; Scheduling needs to take advantage of priority  Responsibilities of the transit agency

WMATA’s Directive Develop a system of Conditional Priority Priority requests tie to specific conditions Schedule Adherence, Location, etc Requires integrated systems on-board the bus Not just better for Transit, more palatable for traffic agencies Develop a system that can operate across jurisdictions

On-Board Bus Systems – Orbital AVL GPS based system Communication via radio 2 minute poll rate Montgomery County Lesson Learned Future integration into scheduling system

On-Board Bus Systems – Clever Devices IVN Uses GPS Requires operator sign- on Provides: Destination signs Voice annunciation Vehicle monitoring Automated Passenger Counters Communicates with garage wirelessly within 1,000 feet

On-Board Bus Systems – Farebox Communicates with garage with infrared Not integrated with other systems Can use current ridership data to improve TSP

Resolution #2: Procurement Needs to Consider ITS Stovepipe approach to procurement Agency suffered without an ITS architecture No consensus related to use of existing devices for new functionalities No integration between new and old devices No recognition of standards that could reduce proprietary nature of systems

On-Board Bus Systems - Issues Multiple operator sign-on Multiple GPS systems Systems not integrated Not sharing data Not integrated to schedule

Concept of Operations Alternative #1 Smart Bus Example - Portland, OR AVL and schedule is integrated on bus Bus requests priority at local controller Priority Granted at local controller

Simple Request Example - King County, WA AVL and schedule not integrated on bus Local controller contains schedule information Local controller detects bus and grants priority Concept of Operations Alternative #2

Centralized Example - Los Angeles, CA Transit Management Center and Traffic Management Center are connected Decisions to grant priority are granted by the Traffic Management Center Concept of Operations Alternative #3

Next Steps for WMATA Bus ITS plan Integration of on-board systems Implement a proof-of-concept Concept of Operation for TSP Recommend preferred alternative Develop a proof-of-concept Test and evaluate proof-of-concept

Resolution #3 Standards based approach Utilize NTCIP 1211 Standard to direct TSP planning for WMATA Isolate and identify the various signal improvements necessary within the jurisdictions Provide fair and equitable investment for the regional partners Upgrade regional signal systems Include other local transit agencies

Transit Signal Priority System Components 1. Support Systems / Management Centers AVL Technology 2. Traffic Signal Systems 3. Bus Detection Other users (emergency vehicle, other)

Transit Signal Priority System Components Support Systems / Management Centers AVL Technology Traffic Signal Systems 3. Bus Detection Other users (emergency vehicle, other)

Bus Detection System Various technology alternatives based on system architecture Optical detector Wayside reader Inductive loop AVL-based Other

Optical Detection System Common detection with emergency vehicle system Detection range is easy to change “Simple” request

Wayside Detection System Tag Antenna TPR Generator Tag Interface Unit for Dynamic Message More Equipment, Improved Range

NTCIP 1211 Standard Bus Detection Suggests message should be broader than simple request Message could include: Estimated time to arrival (ETA) Status (lateness) Updated ETA Class of vehicle (level of priority) Other information used to make strategic decisions

Key Questions to Ask Bus Detection System Do we want one detection system regardless of cost? Where do we put the detection system, or Does the bus know when to request priority or is that understood at the traffic signal? Maintenance and responsibility issues Reliability and latency of messages Extent of reliance on communications What interface do we want with the bus driver?

Questions