connected vehicle infrastructure ......connected vehicle infrastructure deployment considerations:...

49
Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: May 30, 2014

Upload: others

Post on 23-Jun-2020

4 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

May 30, 2014

Page 2: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

[this page intentionally left blank]

Page 3: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  i

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors wish to thank the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute for their support in conducting this research and preparing this report. The authors also acknowledge the contributions of various organizations involved in connected vehicle test programs around the country and wish to thank the following contributors:• MattSmith,MichiganDepartmentofTransportation• CollinCastle,MichiganDepartmentofTransportation• RickMcDonough,NewYorkStateDepartmentofTransportation• DanielleDaneau,RoadCommissionforOaklandCountyMichigan• GlenDavies,RoadCommissionforOaklandCountyMichigan• FaisalSaleem,MaricopaCountyDepartmentofTransportation• LesSipowski,CityofAnnArborMichigan• RussHanshue,CityofAnnArborMichigan• CraigHupy,CityofAnnArborMichigan• ScottShogan,ParsonsBrinckerhoff• AnthonyGasiorowski,ParsonsBrinckerhoff• GregKrueger,Leidos• FrankPerry,Leidos• GeorgeGilhooley,HNTBCorporation• DebbyBezzina,UniversityofMichiganTransportationResearchInstitute

Page 4: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  ii

Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No.

2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No.

4. Title and Subtitle

Connected Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment Considerations: Lessons Learned from the Safety Pilot Model Deployment

5. Report Date

5/30/14

6. Performing Organization Code

7. Author(s)

James C. Barbaresso, HNTB CorporationPatrick Johnson, HNTB Corporation

8. Performing Organization Report No.

9. Performing Organization Name And Address

HNTB Corporation535 Griswold Street, Suite 1100Detroit, MI 48226

10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

11. Contract or Grant No.

DTFH61-11-C-00040

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute 2901 Baxter RoadAnn Arbor, MI 48109

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. Supplementary Notes

16. Abstract

This report describes deployment considerations for connected vehicle infrastructure by state and local transportation agencies in light of a 2014 U.S. DOT decision regarding the future of connected vehicle safety and based on lessons learned from the Safety Pilot Connected Vehicle Model Deployment. A literature review was performed to capture background information and lessons learned from Safety Pilot and other connected vehicle test programs. Interviews were conducted with Safety Pilot team members and affiliated test bed participants to obtain additional, practical lessons learned regarding connected vehicle deployment.

17. Key Words

Connected Vehicles; dedicated short range communications (DSRC); deployment

18. Distribution Statement

19. Security Classif. (of this report)

Unclassified20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages

49 22. Price

N/A

VERSION DATE AUTHOR CHANGE DESCRIPTION

1.0 2/19/14 Jim Barbaresso Original draft

1.1 3/18/14 Jim BarbaressoRevision 1 – Incorporation of UMTRI comments and graphics

1.2 5/30/14 Jim BarbaressoRevision 1.2 - Incorporation of U.S. DOT comments into final version

Page 5: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

p ׀  iii

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................1

BACKGROUND.....................................................................................2Description of the Safety Pilot Model Deployment and Infrastructure ........3

Safety Pilot Model Deployment Vehicle-to-Infrastructure Applications .......4

STUDY APPROACH .............................................................................6

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT NEEDS ........................................................................6

Value of the Basic Safety Message ....................................................................7

Safety and Mobility Needs ..................................................................................8

V2I Applications ...................................................................................................8

Connected Vehicle Data Needs.......................................................................... 11

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CHALLENGES .......................................................... 11

Technical Challenges to Connected Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment ..... 12Technical Maturity, Interoperability and Standards ..................................................12Technical Obsolescence and Changing Requirements ................................................14Application Support Considerations .........................................................................15Data Management Considerations ...........................................................................16Communications ......................................................................................................17Security Considerations............................................................................................18Planning for the Connected Vehicle Environment – Technical Issues ..........................18

Institutional Challenges to Connected Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment 19Resource Requirements .............................................................................................20Technical Skills and Experience ................................................................................20Benefit and Cost Information ...................................................................................20Data Access and Ownership ......................................................................................21Standards and Stability of the Environment ..............................................................22Planning for the Connected Vehicle Environment – Institutional Issues .....................22

CONCLUSION ................................................................................... 23

REFERENCES .................................................................................... 25

APPENDIX A .....................................................................................A-1

APPENDIX B .....................................................................................B-1

Page 6: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  iv

FIGURES

FIguRe 1: The Safety Pilot Model Deployment Area in Ann Arbor, Mich., included both arterial streets and freeways. ....................................................................................... 2

FIguRe 2: Typical installation of connected vehicle roadside equipment at a signalized intersection.................................................................................................................... 3

FIguRe 3: Intersection controller. ........................................................................................................ 3

FIguRe 4: Pedestrian detectors for transit safety application. ......................................................... 4

FIguRe 5: Connected Vehicle Infrastructure Communications Block Diagram............................... 5

TABLES

TABle 1: Connected Vehicle Infrastructure Needs for Public Agencies Involved in the Study ...........9

TABle 2: V2I Applications Cited by Respondents ............................................................................ 10

Page 7: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  1

INTRODUCTIONThe University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI) and the United StatesDepartmentofTransportation(U.S.DOT)areconductingamodeldeploymentofconnectedvehicles,calledSafetyPilot,inAnnArbor,Michigan.Thepurposeofthemodeldeploymentistotesttheeffectivenessof connected vehicle safety applications for reducingcrashes,toshowhowdriversrespondto these technologies while operating a vehicle inareal-world,multimodalenvironment,andtoevaluatethefeasibility,scalability,security,andinteroperabilityofDedicatedShortRangeCommunications(DSRC)technology.EmpiricaldatacollectedduringSafetyPilothasbeenevaluatedtopresentamoreaccurate,detailedunderstanding of the potential safety benefits ofconnectedvehicletechnologies.Infact,thesedataprovidedabasisforaNationalHighwayTrafficSafetyAdministration(NHTSA)agencydecision regarding connected vehicle safety on February3,2014.Thisdecisionsentasignaltoautomakers and government agencies that the implementation of connected vehicle technology is highly probable within the next few years.TheU.S.DOTispreparingforsuchimplementationby seeking input from stakeholders regarding deploymentconsiderations.AttheU.S.DOTExternalStakeholdersOutreachMeeting,heldonJanuary16,2014inWashington,D.C.,theFederalHighwayAdministration(FHWA)presentedthe following connected vehicle deployment expectationsfromtheAmericanAssociationofStateHighwayandTransportationOfficials(AASHTO)FieldInfrastructureFootprintAnalysis:• DSRCwillbeavailableinnewvehiclesby2020.• Aminimalamountofconnectedvehicle

infrastructurewouldbeinplaceby2020,witha25%build-outby2025.

• Major commercial and interstate highway corridors will be among the first highway segments to be equipped within this timeframe.

• By2040,80%ofallsignalizedintersectionsand25,000otherroadsideunitswouldbeavailablenationwide.

The realization of these expectations will haveanimpactontheautoindustry,butalso on state and local road agencies. The purpose of this report is to summarize connected vehicle deployment considerations fromapractitioner’sperspective,applyinglessonslearnedfromSafetyPilotandotherconnectedvehicle test bed programs around the country. Itwillofferrealisticguidancetopractitionersinlightofthe2014NHTSAdecision.Infrastructureconsiderationsrelatedtoroadsideequipment,communications,head-endhardware,andsoftwareareemphasizedinthisreport.Policyandotherinstitutional considerations are also addressed.The information contained in this report will supplement other initiatives related to connected vehicleinfrastructureconsiderations,including:• TheFieldInfrastructureFootprintAnalysisbeing

conductedbyAASHTO.• TheCooperativeTransportationSystemsPooled

FundStudyledbytheVirginiaDOTwithtechnicalsupportfromtheUniversityofVirginiaCenterforTransportationStudies.

• TheFederalHighwayAdministration(FHWA)2015ConnectedVehicleDeploymentGuidancedocument.

This report addresses the infrastructure deploymentchallengesfacedduringSafetyPilot,butalsoprovidesageneraldiscussionof infrastructure deployment considerations that will face public agencies and other practitioners as they face the opportunity for connected vehicle infrastructure deployment.

Page 8: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  2

BACKGROUND

TheSafetyPilotModelDeploymentistheprimary basis for the findings in this report. Asthelargestandmostrecentdeploymentofconnected vehicle technology in the United States,SafetyPilotprovidestheopportunityfor learning from practitioners and consultants

involvedintheproject.Practitionersandprojectparticipants from other connected vehicle test projects were included in this study to obtain information about the challenges they faced also. AmongtheothercontributorsweretheRoadCommissionforOaklandCountyMichigan,theMaricopaCountyArizonaDOT,theNewYorkStateDOT,andtheFloridaDOT.

FIguRe 1: The Safety Pilot Model Deployment Area in Ann Arbor, Mich., included both arterial streets and freeways.

Page 9: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  3

Description of the Safety Pilot Model Deployment and Infrastructure

SafetyPilotinvolvedinstallingconnectedvehicletechnologyinapproximately2,800cars,trucks,buses,motorcyclesandbicycles;deployingroadsideequipmentalong73lane-milesofarterialstreetsandlimitedaccesshighways;andequippingfacilities to process the resulting data used to evaluate connected vehicle safety benefits and to supporttheU.S.DOTdecisiontoproceedwiththe regulatory process to mandate connected vehicle safety equipment in light vehicles.UMTRI recruited and prepared volunteers to participateinthemodeldeployment.Driverswererecruited primarily from areas east and northeast ofdowntownAnnArbor,Michigan.Themodeldeployment required high concentrations of drivers along the outfitted routes as shown in Figure 1.1

TheprimaryroutescoveredincludeU.S.23,M-14,PlymouthRoad,WashtenawAvenue,andtheFuller/GeddescorridorintheAnnArborarea.Theseroutes were selected to capture the majority of test participant drivers during their daily commutes. The mix of freeways and city streets allowed researchers toevaluatetheeffectivenessofthetechnologyondifferentroadtypesanddrivingconditions.Dedicatedshort-rangecommunicationswere installed along these routes at:• 21signalizedintersections,• 3curvelocations,and• 3freewaysites.Allsitesincludedasecurecommunicationlinkforcollectionofthestudydata.Atypicalintersection installation is shown in Figure 2.Figure 3 shows the inside of a traffic signal controller cabinet with the traffic signal controller,detectorrack,andswitchfortheconnected vehicle equipment. This controller configuration includes pedestrian detection which is used for alerting turning buses about the presence of pedestrians in the crosswalk.

FIguRe 2: Typical installation of connected vehicle roadside equipment at a signalized intersection.

FIguRe 3: Intersection controller.

Page 10: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  4

The pedestrian detectors are shown in Figure 4.Figure 5 brings all of the elements at a typical intersection together. This diagram demonstrates the communications linkages between various elementsinthesystem,fromtheconnectedvehicletotheRSUandintersectioncontrollertothebackoffice.Securitymanagementisaccommodated by an enterprise level security managementsystem,butalsothroughnetworksecurity appliances where subsystems intersect. AsetofplansheetsshowingtypicalfreewayRSUinstallationsisshowninAppendixB.Theconfiguration for freeway sites is similar to that for intersections,especiallywheretheRSUiscollocatedwithotherfreewaymanagementsystemequipment,whereadevicecontrolcabinetisrequired.ForthefreewaysitesinAnnArbor,wirelessbackhaulcommunicationswithrelayslinkthesitestotheCityofAnnArborfiberopticcommunicationsnetwork.

Safety Pilot Model Deployment Vehicle-to-Infrastructure Applications

TheprimaryintentofSafetyPilotwastoevaluatevehicle-to-vehicle(V2V)safetyapplicationsalthoughvehicle-to-infrastructure(V2I)applications were also deployed as part of the program.TheSafetyPilotroadsideequipmentwas primarily used for data collection and for distribution of security certificates to support theV2Vapplications.V2Iapplicationsincludedcurve speed warning at three locations and SignalPhaseandTiming(SPaT)applicationsattwelveintersectionsalongtheFuller/GeddesandPlymouthRoadcorridors.BecausethetrafficsignalsalongPlymouthRoadoperateadaptivecontrol(SplitCycleOffsetOptimizationTechnique-SCOOT),SPaTimplementationwas more challenging than with fixed time signalplans.TheissueregardinguseofSPaTatadaptive traffic signals is addressed more fully laterinthisreport.Additionally,pedestriandetection was deployed at one intersection on theFullercorridortoalertdriversofturning

FIguRe 4: Pedestrian detectors for transit safety application.

transit vehicles to the presence of pedestrians in thecrosswalk,andanicewarningsystemwasinstalledatonelocationalongPlymouthRoad.SafetyPilotwasnotintendedtobealargescaletestofV2Iapplications.Instead,itwasintendedtoprovideabasisfortheevaluationofV2Vapplications in a real-world environment in supportoftheNHTSAdecisionrelatedtoV2Vsafety. The experimental design and concept of operationsforSafetyPilotincluded,butdidnotemphasize,infrastructureandV2IapplicationstothesameextentasV2Vapplications.Nevertheless,certain deployment and operations issues related to the connected vehicle infrastructure were manifested during the project. WhileSafetyPilotprovidedacoupleoftypicalV2Iapplications,othertestprogramsaroundthecountryincludedotherV2Iapplicationsthatmaybeofinteresttopractitioners,includingemergencyand transit vehicle priority and freight applications. Therefore,thisreportincludeslessonslearnedfromothertestprogramsinadditiontoSafetyPilot.

Page 11: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  5

FIguRe 5: Connected Vehicle Infrastructure Communications Block Diagram.

Page 12: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  6

STUDY APPROACH

The study approach involved two elements. The first element included a literature review to identify information that might be helpful to practitioners inlightoftheU.S.DOTdecisiononconnectedvehicle safety. The documents reviewed included:

1. SafetyPilotdocumentationa. Requirementsb. Plansandspecifications

2. AASHTOConnectedVehicleFieldInfrastructureFootprintAnalysisdocuments

3. U.S.DOTdocumentation,includingpresentations,reportsandwebpages

The second element of the study approach involvedinterviewswithmembersoftheSafetyPilotinfrastructureteamandotheragencyrepresentatives involved in connected vehicle test projects. Interviews were conducted via telephoneorinperson.Aquestionnaire,employingopen-endedquestions,wasusedtocapturetheinformation. The discussions with practitioners weremostoften“free-ranging”astheintervieweesbecameengaged.Copiesofthequestionnairesused for practitioners and for consultant team membersareincludedinAppendixA.SafetyPilotteammembersincludedin the interview process came from the following organizations:

• Test conductor team members

• CityofAnnArbor

• MichiganDOTInadditiontotheSafetyPilotteammembers,othersatthefollowingorganizations were interviewed:

• RoadCommissionforOaklandCounty(RCOC)Michigan

• MaricopaCountyDepartmentofTransportation(MCDOT)Arizona

• FloridaDOT• NewYorkStateDOTThe interview process involved both practitioners and consultants. This framework was intended to elicit practitioner concerns related to connected vehicleinfrastructuredeployment,butalsotoobtain the input of experts from the consulting community related to those concerns. The remainder of this report outlines the current state of research regarding connected vehicle infrastructure deployment considerations and how the practitioner community views their readiness for potential deployment. The findings of this research are anecdotal in nature due to the structure oftheresearchprocess.However,thelessonslearned by the practitioner community and their consultants on various test projects will provide important insights for public agencies as connected vehicle technology is implemented. These findings willalsoprovideinsightstosupporttheFHWAindevelopmentoftheirguidancedocumentsin2015.

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT NEEDS

The primary emphasis of the connected vehicle programthusfarhasbeenonV2Vsafety.However,most public agencies are uncertain about the role of infrastructure in a connected vehicle environment. Questions abound about how muchinfrastructureisneeded,whereitshouldbelocated,whatwillthepublicagencyberesponsiblefor,whatskillswillbeneeded,whatdatawillbeavailable,whatbenefitswillberealized,howmuchitwillcost,andwhatbusinessmodelswillbeinplacetosupportapplicationdevelopment,securitymanagement,datamanagement,anduserprivacy.Infrastructure deployment needs of public agencies have been addressed primarily by AASHTO,2,3,5,6,7 which has been working with the U.S.DOT,TransportCanada,andtheInstitute

Page 13: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  7

of Transportation Engineers (ITE) on connected vehicle infrastructure deployment research.AASHTO’semphasishasbeentoestablishanational“footprint”forfieldinfrastructuredeployment. This represents a set of broad research objectives related to the scale of a national deployment and the costs of such deployment. These are important considerations for national policyandfundingsupport.AASHTOalsoengaged the practitioner community to assess priorityapplications,andidentifyworkforce,training,policyandguidanceneeds.AASHTO’sApplicationsAnalysis3 includes a goodsummaryofV2Iapplicationsthatwillform the basis of most connected vehicle infrastructure programs at the state and local levels. The application groups and bundles identifiedbyAASHTOprovideausefulframework for understanding deployment needsandconsiderations.However,manyoftheapplicationsidentifiedintheAASHTOreport were not identified as priorities among the respondents in this study. This demonstrates thatmostlocalagencies,eventhoseinvolvedinconnectedvehicletestprograms,maynothave a good understanding of the range of applications that will be available in the future.

Value of the Basic Safety Message

Atthemostbasiclevel,publicagencieswantaccesstotheBasicSafetyMessage(BSMPart1)data to monitor and measure the performance oftheirtransportationsystems.Aboveallotherapplications,performancemeasurementrepresented the most fundamental need of the agenciesinvolvedinthisstudy.Simpleprobedata,comprisingvehiclelocation,speedandheading,canbeusedbypublicagenciesfortrafficmonitoring,AdvancedTravelerInformationSystems(ATIS),trafficsignaltiminganalyses,andplanningpurposes. The public agencies do not require real-timedataformanyofthesebasicneeds,withtheexceptionofATISapplications.However,they

expressed the need for near real-time data in the future as probe data may be used for new traffic signalcontrolstrategies,corridormanagement,and other active traffic management purposes.AdditionaldataavailablefromtheBSMPart2,suchasprecipitation,airtemperature,wiperstatus,lightstatus,roadcoefficientoffriction,AntilockBrakeSystem(ABS)activation,TractionControlSystem(TCS)activation,andvehicletype,willsupportroadsurfaceconditionmonitoring,ATIS,enhancedmaintenancedecisionsupportsystems,and asset management related applications. The value of these data can be enhanced through aggregationwithdatafromothersources,suchasstationarysensorsystems(EnvironmentalSensingStations,Road-WeatherInformationSystems,CCTVcameras,trafficsensors).Theneedfornear real-time data for road surface condition monitoring and road-weather applications is important in the short term to support maintenance decision support and response strategies. AsreportedbyMcGurrin4,theBSMisusefulforalimitednumberofthemoresophisticatedV2Iapplications,especiallywithlimitedroadwaycoverage.However,itappearsthatmanypublicagencyneedscanbeaddressedbyBSMdataintheshort term based on the findings of this study. The penetration rate of probe vehicles is another consideration for public agencies seeking to install connected vehicle infrastructure. Rehborn et al8 found that a two percent penetration rate of connectedvehicleprobeswouldprovide“premiumquality”dataforbasicapplications.ThefindingsofZou et al9differedsignificantlyfromRehbornbutstill demonstrated that benefits from probe vehicles

AT THE MOST BASIC LEVEL, PUBLIC AGENCIES

WANT ACCESS TO THE BASIC SAFETY

MESSAGE (BSM PART 1) DATA TO MONITOR

AND MEASURE THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS.

Page 14: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  8

can be achieved with only a small penetration rate. Zou developed a travel time algorithm using simulatedconnectedvehicleprobes.Withaprobevehiclepenetrationrateof5%,a12.5%averageerrorratewasfound.Theerrorratedroppedbelow10%onlywhentheprobepenetrationrateexceeded10%.These studies indicate that reliable data can be collectedevenwitha5-10%penetrationrateforconnectedvehicleprobes.Withasmallnumber of roadside units strategically located onstateandlocalroadnetworks,manyofthebasic needs expressed by practitioners could bemetwithminorvehiclepenetrationrates,especially if the probe data is fused with data from other sources to increase its reliability.

Safety and Mobility Needs

Safetyimprovementsandcrashreductionneedswere mentioned by all of the respondents during thisstudy.However,theCityofAnnArborreported no significant change in crash frequency onanyofthestreetsinAnnArborequippedwithconnected vehicle infrastructure. They also noted thattheCitydidnothaveaccesstoSafetyPilotdata that might reveal useful surrogate safety measures,suchasthenumberofconflicts.TheyareanxioustoobtaintheresultsoftheU.S.DOTevaluation on the safety impacts of the technology. The importance of infrastructure to provide incremental safety benefits should not be overlooked,butotherneedswereweighedequallyorevenhigherbymanyofthepractitioners.Allrespondents certainly recognized the value of connectedvehicletechnologyforsafety,butalsorecognizedthatV2Vapplicationswouldprovidemany of the gains in safety benefits. They also

stated that safety benefits would increase as the number of connected vehicles increases. Until there isascaledgrowthofequippedvehicles,theneedfor connected vehicle infrastructure will be low. Intheshortterm,mostofthepublicagency practitioners placed more emphasis onmobility,trafficoperationsandtrafficsignaltimingimprovement,roadconditionassessment,performancemanagementandassetmaintenance/management.Theseapplicationsdo not rely on all vehicles being equipped.Table 1 summarizes the needs expressed by public agency practitioners involved in this study. These needs do not necessarily represent the needs of the entire user community.

V2I Applications

The needs expressed by the practitioners in this study tell only part of the story. The applications that will be developed to support these needs are equally important. Table 2isderivedfromtheAASHTONationalConnectedVehicleFieldInfrastructureFootprintAnalysis–ApplicationsAnalysis.3 ThistablesummarizestheV2Iapplicationsenvisioned for various application bundles and cited as most needed by respondents. Many of theseapplicationsarealsothesubjectofU.S.DOTconnected vehicle research programs.10,11,12,13,14

Fourapplicationareaswerementionedas priorities by practitioners:

• Agencydataapplications

• Mobility applications

• Road-Weatherapplications

• Safetyapplications

IN THE SHORT TERM, MOST OF THE PUBLIC AGENCY PRACTITIONERS PLACED MORE EMPHASIS ON

MOBILITY, TRAFFIC OPERATIONS AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL TIMING IMPROVEMENT, ROAD CONDITION

ASSESSMENT, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT AND ASSET MAINTENANCE/MANAGEMENT.

Page 15: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  9

TABle 1: Connected Vehicle Infrastructure Needs for Public Agencies Involved in the Study

Connected Vehicle Infrastructure Needs

Public Agencies

City of Ann Arbor

Michigan DOT

Maricopa County DOT

Road Commission for Oakland

County

New York State DOT

Short Term

Data Capture for Improved Traffic Signal Operations (Signal Phase and Timing)

X X X X X

Data Capture for Winter Maintenance or Asset Management

X X X X

Data Capture for Planning X X X X X

Data Capture for Performance Measurement X X X X X

long Term

Crash Reduction X X X X X

Reduce Other Infrastructure Needs (Signing, Stationary Detection, etc.) X X X X X

Asmentionedabove,agencydataapplicationsareshort term priorities for public agencies. This is based on their need to monitor and improve the performance of their street and highway systems.Mobility applications are also very important for stateandlocalagencies.Intheshortterm,theysee benefits from improved traveler information asdatafromvarioussources,includingconnectedvehicles,isaggregatedtoprovidearicher data set and more reliable information. Asthenumberofconnectedvehiclesincreasesandasthetechnologymatures,publicagencies

perceive an opportunity to implement corridor management and multimodal intelligent traffic signalsystemapplications.Ultimately,theybelievethat new traffic signal control strategies will be developedtoreplacecurrentfixedtime,trafficresponsive and adaptive control algorithms.

Road weather applications were also considered important to public agency respondents. The purpose of these applications would be for internal operational andmaintenanceenhancements,butalsotoalertmotorists to road surface and driving conditions.

Page 16: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  10

TABle 2: V2I Applications Cited by Respondents

Connected Vehicle Infrastructure Needs

Public Agencies

City of Ann Arbor

Michigan DOT

Maricopa County DOT

Road Commission for Oakland

County

New York State DOT

Agency Data Applications

Probe Based Traffic Monitoring X X X X X

Probe Based Pavement Condition Monitoring X X X X X

Performance Measures X X X X X

Mobility Applications

Enable ATIS X X X X X

Freight ATIS (FRATIS) X X

Corridor Management X X X X X

Transit Vehicle Priority X X

Multimodal Intelligent Traffic Signal Systems X X X X X

Road Weather Applications

Motorist Advisories and Warnings X X X X X

Information for Maintenance and Fleet Management Systems X X X X X

Maintenance Decision Support Systems X X X X X

V2I Safety Applications

Intersection Collision Warning X X X X X

Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption X

Work Zone Alerts X X X X X

Curve Speed Warning X X X

Railroad Crossing Violation Warning X X X X X

Page 17: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  11

Finally,safetywascertainlyapriorityforallofthepublicagenciesincludedinthisstudy.However,thetimeframeforV2IandI2Vsafetyapplicationswasviewed as lagging behind other applications since they depend on a growing number of equipped vehiclestobeeffective.Agencydataapplications,mobility applications and road weather applications only require a small percentage of the overall fleettobeequipped,whereassafetyapplicationswill require the vast majority of vehicles to beequippedforoptimumeffectiveness.Many agencies envision a time in the future when stationarysensorswillnotbeneeded.Instead,connected vehicles and other mobile devices will provide the data they will need to manage their systems. This could potentially result in large savings for traditional infrastructure deploymentandmaintenance,butmayhave impacts on staffing requirements and information technology (IT) resources.WhiletheinterviewswithpublicagencystaffinvolvedprimarilyDSRCtechnology,somerespondentsnotedthatDSRCisonlyneededforsafety-critical,low-latencyapplications.Theysuggested that cellular technology may provide an alternative for many mobility and traveler information applications that do not require V2Vcommunications.Thismayrelievepublicagencies of the cost burden anticipated with theinstallation,maintenanceandoperationof connected vehicle infrastructure while also providing a more ubiquitous solution during the transition period as connected vehicle penetrationincreases.Asconnectedvehiclepenetrationratesincrease,thenthenumberofV2Iapplicationsandtheperceivedvalueofconnected vehicle infrastructure will increase.

Connected Vehicle Data Needs

Whilenotrelatedtoaspecificapplication,practitioners expressed a general concern about theirabilitytoobtain,share,store,aggregate,process,andanalyzethevastamountofdatagenerated by connected vehicles and from other sources in the future. This seemed to be a theme relatedtotheAgencyDataApplicationscitedbythepractitioners and a concern for public agencies.Datamanagement,includingdatacollection,filtering,aggregation,storageandanalysis,atthe local level was identified as a critical need as connectedvehiclesenterthemarket.Whilesomepublic agencies may have resources to facilitate these activities,itwasclearfromtheinterviewprocessthat staffing and information technology resources were woefully lacking in most agencies due to wage ratesandfundingconstraints.Also,mostagenciesdo not have a clear understanding of what physical resources (communications and head-end storage capacity) may be required. This issue has implications fortraining,organizationalrequirements,contractingand business models for public agencies in the future.

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CHALLENGES

Publicagencypractitionersidentifiednumerousconnected vehicle infrastructure deployment challenges during the next decade. They recognizethatV2IapplicationswilllagbehindV2Vdeploymentforavarietyofreasons,bothtechnicalandinstitutional,andthatascaleddeployment of connected vehicles is required to achieve most of their safety and mobility goals.

DATA MANAGEMENT, INCLUDING DATA COLLECTION, FILTERING, AGGREGATION, STORAGE AND ANALYSIS,

AT THE LOCAL LEVEL WAS IDENTIFIED AS A CRITICAL NEED AS CONNECTED VEHICLES ENTER THE MARKET.

Page 18: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  12

They feel that the federal research focus has beenprimarilyonV2Vapplicationsandtesting.WhilethefederalresearchfocuswilllikelyshifttoimplementationofV2Iapplicationsoverthenextdecade,aninfrastructurelagwillexist.The technical and institutional challenges facing public agencies are summarized below.

Technical Challenges to Connected Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment

Allofthepractitionersandcontractorsinvolvedin this study have experience in the deployment of connected vehicle infrastructure as part of SafetyPilotorothertestprograms.Mostfeelthatthe technical issues will be addressed over the nextfiveyearstocorrespondwiththeU.S.DOTtimeline for connected vehicle implementation.The practitioners involved in this study felt that thephysicalinstallationoftheDSRCequipmentwas relatively straightforward and does not pose much concern. Most of the practitioners are accustomed to working with radio equipment in conjunction with other traffic control devices. Therefore,theyarefamiliarwithtechniquesforassessinglineofsight,calibrationoftheequipment,and hanging such devices on poles and mast-arms. They seem to understand range limitations for PoweroverEthernet(POE)cabling,lightning/surgeprotection,andotherroutinemattersrelated to installation and maintenance of the connected vehicle equipment. Most agencies view connected vehicle infrastructure as an extension of their current traffic control equipment.

The technical challenges they face do not pertain to the physical installation of the equipment. Rather,theyseechallengesrelatedtothematuritylevelofconnectedvehicleequipment,interoperabilityandstandards,theimplementationofspecificapplications,applicationsupport,datamanagement,communicationsandnetworkmanagement,localnetworksecurity,andnetworkoptimization. These topics are addressed below.

Technical Maturity, Interoperability and Standards

The technical challenges experienced by the respondents were related mostly to the maturity of the connected vehicle equipment and other technologies required for implementation. The respondents unanimously agreed that the currently deployedRoadsideUnits(RSU)areprototypesandarenot“street-ready.”Forexample,practitionersfeel that connected vehicle infrastructure components lack the technical maturity of other traffic control devices they typically deploy. Most public agencies are risk averse when it comestodeploymentoftechnologysolutions,especially related to traffic signal systems and othersafety-criticalinfrastructure.Consequently,the public agencies involved in this study expressed their concerns about the robustness oftheequipment,interoperability,technologyobsolescence,andchangingrequirements.The environment is viewed as unstable at this time. This poses some discomfort among public agencies,seekingstabilityandsolid,long-lastingsolutionsthattheycandeployonanaffordable

THE FEDERAL RESEARCH FOCUS HAS BEEN

PRIMARILY ON V2V APPLICATIONS AND

TESTING. WHILE THE FEDERAL RESEARCH

FOCUS WILL LIKELY SHIFT TO IMPLEMENTATION

OF V2I APPLICATIONS OVER THE NEXT DECADE,

AN INFRASTRUCTURE LAG WILL EXIST.

THE TECHNICAL CHALLENGES EXPERIENCED BY

THE RESPONDENTS WERE RELATED MOSTLY TO

THE MATURITY OF THE CONNECTED VEHICLE

EQUIPMENT AND OTHER TECHNOLOGIES

REQUIRED FOR IMPLEMENTATION.

Page 19: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  13

basis.Therefore,mostofthemstatedthattheywillproceedcautiouslywithdeployment.Acertification process and entity was mentioned by almost all of the respondents as a requirement toprovidestandard,robustsolutionsinthefuture.TheyfeltthattheU.S.DOTshouldplaya role in defining the certification process.Allofthepublicagenciesexpressedconcernregarding the robustness of the currently available roadsideequipment.DevicefailureshavebeencommonwiththecurrentRSUs.Duringtestprojects,equipmentinstabilitystrainedthestaffresources of the agencies involved. They cited thetimeandeffortrequiredforbenchtestingpriortoinstallationoftheequipment.Onceinstalled,theyallmentionedtheneedforfrequentmaintenance of the equipment. They expressed adesireforspecializeddiagnostictools,remotemanagementcapabilities,andtheabilitytoresettheRSUsremotelytoreducerecurringtripstothe field to meet maintenance requirements. Practitionersalsoexpressedtheneedforstandardization among traffic signal control equipment.Theuseofdifferentcontrolequipmentby adjacent highway departments should not impactregionaldeploymentefforts.Connectedvehicles must work identically across jurisdictional boundaries. This interoperability issue was addressedtosomeextentonSafetyPilot.However,each traffic signal controller manufacturer

has proprietary elements that limit complete interoperability.TheuseofModel2070AdvancedTrafficControllers(ATC)providesamoreuniversal hardware platform for interoperability. SafetyPilotincludedtwodifferenttrafficsignalcontroller manufacturers to test interoperability acrosscontrollerplatforms.TheNationalTransportationCommunicationsforIntelligentTransportationSystemProtocol(NTCIP)wasemployedtoenableuseofdatafromdifferingcontrollermanufacturers.However,theCityofAnnArborfoundthattheircentralcontrolsoftwarewasunabletoobtainsomedatafromfieldcontrollersfromadifferentmanufacturerdespitetheuseofNTCIP.Thisindicatesthatmore work is needed to provide the seamless solutions being sought by local agencies.Stateandlocalagenciesarealsoseekingafullyintegratedsolution.Currentdevicespecificationsdonotprovidesuchasolution.A“blackbox”solutionwasintroducedduringSafetyPilotastheinterfacebetweentheRSUandthetrafficcontrollers.The“blackbox”solutionwasimplementedtotranslateSPaTmessagessentfromthetrafficcontrollertotheRSUandtoenableIPv6communications.Thepractitionersviewthiscurrentinterfacesolutionasalow-risk,temporary,yetcumbersome,“work-around.”Theyareseekingastandardsolution,wherethe connected vehicle equipment will operate

THE ENVIRONMENT IS VIEWED AS UNSTABLE AT THIS TIME. THIS POSES SOME DISCOMFORT AMONG

PUBLIC AGENCIES, SEEKING STABILITY AND SOLID, LONG-LASTING SOLUTIONS THAT THEY CAN

DEPLOY ON AN AFFORDABLE BASIS. THEREFORE, MOST OF THEM STATED THAT THEY WILL PROCEED

CAUTIOUSLY WITH DEPLOYMENT.

THE USE OF DIFFERENT CONTROL EQUIPMENT BY ADJACENT HIGHWAY DEPARTMENTS SHOULD NOT

IMPACT REGIONAL DEPLOYMENT EFFORTS. CONNECTED VEHICLES MUST WORK IDENTICALLY ACROSS

JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES.

Page 20: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  14

seamlessly with any brand or model of traffic control equipment. They look forward to a more robust and integrated solution from traffic controllermanufacturers.Futureimplementationwill require a more integrated solution.SomeagencieswouldliketoseetheRSUplacedinthe cabinet (with the antenna on a pole or mast-arm)foreaseofmaintenance.However,sometrafficcontrol cabinets are already packed with equipment. This may require new specifications for traffic signalcontrollers,cabinetsandotherenclosures.Onemanufacturerhasintroducedanewcontrollercabinet design with a separate compartment and doorsforITS-relatedequipment.Thisnotonlywouldaddressthespaceissue,butcouldalsoaddressthe concern expressed by some agencies about allowingthirdpartiestomaintainDSRCequipmentin the future. The practitioners expressed the need to work with traffic controller manufacturers to achieve an integrated solution. They also expressed a desire for detailed documentation on how to wire,configure,andintegratetheequipment.Agenciesidentifiedaconcernabouttheneedto upgrade their existing traffic signal control equipment to accommodate connected vehicle technology.Controllermanufacturershavebeen working on solutions where their traffic signal control equipment can be updated to provideSPaTdatawithsimplesoftwareandfirmwareretrofits.Whilethismayaddresssomeof the cost issues involved in upgrading traffic controllers,spaceneedsstillcouldbeanissue.Amorecomprehensivesolutiontoconnectedvehicle infrastructure needs at signalized intersectionsisexpectedwithinthenextyear.U.S.DOTeffortstoupdatethespecificationfortheroadside unit will eliminate some of the ambiguity in the current specification and improve the robustness of the equipment. The new specification (Specification4.0)willbemoreofapreproductionunit specification than current prototype versions oftheequipment.KeychangeswillincludeintegratedGlobalPositioningSystem(GPS),

POEcapabilitythatsupportsIPv4andIPv6,aNEMA-gradeenclosure,andmean-time-between-failures(MTBF)thatistypicalforcarrier-gradecommunications equipment. These new features will address many of the concerns expressed by practitioners,butmaystillmayfallshortofwhatagencies are typically accustomed to deploying.Aswithmosttechnologiesintheirinfancy,othertechnical issues will manifest as the deployment scale increases. Experienced practitioners mentioned this risk as part of the normal product maturity cycle. Productupdatesandnewversionswillcertainlybe needed to mitigate issues that are introduced with scale. Much of this is outside the control of thepublicagencies,sincetheautomanufacturerswill likely drive the standards during the next decade.Consequently,manypublicagencieswill wait until the environment is more stable before they enter the connected vehicle market.

Technical Obsolescence and Changing Requirements

Allofthepractitionersexpressedconcernabouttechnical obsolescence. The current timeframe forimplementationofDSRCtechnologyislengthyenoughtosuggestthatother,morerobustor advanced technologies will be introduced torenderDSRCobsoletebeforeitisfully

U.S. DOT EFFORTS TO UPDATE THE

SPECIFICATION FOR THE ROADSIDE UNIT WILL

ELIMINATE SOME OF THE AMBIGUITY IN THE

CURRENT SPECIFICATION AND IMPROVE THE

ROBUSTNESS OF THE EQUIPMENT.

PRODUCT UPDATES AND NEW VERSIONS WILL

CERTAINLY BE NEEDED TO MITIGATE ISSUES

THAT ARE INTRODUCED WITH SCALE.

Page 21: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  15

deployed. The likelihood of such disruption may create inertia among public agencies.

TheDSRCmanufacturersaresmallcompanies,and the market is very immature at this time. Consequently,marketforceswilllikelydrivesome of the current equipment providers out of business. This is a risk for public agencies that enter this arena as early adopters. This riskiscompoundedifothertechnologies,suchascellular,grablargermarketshares.

Alloftherespondentsindicatedaneedforstandardsthat would account for disruptive changes. The standards would allow forward and backward compatibility. Most agencies would be satisfied witha10yearlifefromtheequipmenttheyinstallbased on the benefits they feel would be achieved.

Application Support Considerations

Asoutlinedpreviously,localagencieswillseeksupportfromtheU.S.DOTorfromtheprivatesector to develop other needed applications. Most agencies do not have internal capabilities to develop connected vehicle applications.

SPaTdataiscriticalformostapplicationssoughtbyagencies.TheacquisitionanduseofSPaTdatahave proven to be more difficult than originally envisioned by the public agencies. They are anxioustoobtaintheresultsoftheIntegratedV2I

PrototyperesearcheffortsunderwaybytheU.S.DOT,wheretheSPaTinterfacewillbeimproved.That research project will more clearly define the interface specification and standards for two-way communication (information exchange and dataflows)betweentrafficsignalsandvehicles.Currently,SPaThasbeenimplementedattwelveintersectionsfortheSafetyPilotModelDeploymentandattwenty-twolocationsalongTelegraphRoadinOaklandCounty,Michigan.ThetrafficsignalsatwhichSPaThasbeenimplementedonTelegraphRoadareoperatingverysimple,two-phase timing plans. This has allowed testing ofSPaTcapabilitiesinasimplesignaltimingenvironment,buttheagenciesnotedthattheywanttoexpandresearcheffortstomorecomplextraffic signals and intersection configurations.SafetyPilotofferedamorecomplexenvironmentforSPaTimplementation,wheredifferenttrafficcontroller manufacturers would be involved along with more complex signal timing plans and intersectionconfigurations.SPaTwasimplementedonboththeFuller/GeddesRoadcorridorandthePlymouthRoadcorridorduringSafetyPilot.EachofthesecorridorsoffereduniquecharacteristicsfortestingSPaT.SixtrafficsignalsalongtheFuller/GeddescorridorusedEconoliteTMtrafficsignalcontrolequipment.TheCityofAnnArborhad no experience with this brand of traffic controlequipmentinthepast.AnadditionalsixintersectionsalongPlymouthRoadwereSPaT-enabled.ThesesignalswereoperatingtheSCOOTadaptivetrafficsignalcontrolsystem.TheintersectionsalongFullerRoadareoperatingfixed-time traffic signal timing plans. This means that the signal phases do not vary on a cycle-

THE CURRENT TIMEFRAME FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF DSRC TECHNOLOGY IS LENGTHY ENOUGH TO

SUGGEST THAT OTHER, MORE ROBUST OR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES WILL BE INTRODUCED TO

RENDER DSRC OBSOLETE BEFORE IT IS FULLY DEPLOYED. THE LIKELIHOOD OF SUCH DISRUPTION MAY

CREATE INERTIA AMONG PUBLIC AGENCIES.

MOST AGENCIES DO NOT HAVE INTERNAL

CAPABILITIES TO DEVELOP CONNECTED

VEHICLE APPLICATIONS.

Page 22: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  16

by-cyclebasis.ThissituationallowsSPaTtoprovide“countdown”dataattrafficsignalsalongFullerRoad.TheintersectionofFullerRoadandMaidenDrivealsoincludespedestriandetectionfortransitoperations.Whenapedestrianispresentinthecrosswalkatthisintersection,busesinvolvedintheSafetyPilotModelDeploymentreceive warning messages to facilitate safe turning movements. This information is sent along with SPaTdatatotheapproachingbuses,thusaddingsomecomplexitytotheSPaTapplication.ThetrafficsignalsalongPlymouthRoadinAnnArborareoperatingtheSCOOTadaptivetrafficsignal control system. The challenge with adaptive trafficcontrolishowtoreliablybroadcastSPaTmessages when phase lengths are not predictable. InAnnArbor’scase,Siemenshasdeterminedthat only the last five seconds of a phase would need to be broadcast in order to provide ample timefordriverwarningsatintersections.SiemensmadesomeadjustmentsintheSCOOTcentralsystemtoprovidea5-secondcountdownforsignalsalongPlymouthRoad.ThistechniqueoffersapossiblewaytouseSPaTapplicationsat traffic signals operating in adaptive mode. However,itwasnotedthatthe“waitperiods”forbroadcastoftheSPaTdataalongPlymouthRoad introduced other impacts and the absence ofSPaTdataduringthose“waitperiods”restricted the types of applications available. Sincemanypublicroadagencieshaveimplementedor are evaluating deployment of adaptive traffic signalcontrolstrategies,thePlymouthRoadexperienceoffersimportantlessonsregardinguseofSPaTatsuchintersections.Forexample,AnnArbor,MaricopaCountyandtheRoadCommissionforOaklandCountyallcurrentlyoperate adaptive traffic control systems. Each of these agencies recognize the weaknesses in the currentSPaTsolutionsforadaptivecontrol.Inthefuture,itislikelythatnewadaptivecontrolalgorithms will be developed to leverage connected vehicle probe data. Many of the practitioners felt that this would be a good research topic.

Data Management Considerations

Allagenciesinvolvedinthisstudyexpresseduncertainty about the availability and ownership of connected vehicle probe data. They also expressed an apparent need for data managementresources,includingstoragecapabilities,staffingtoanalyzethedata,andnew ways to present the data in useful forms. TheamountofdatacapturedduringSafetyPilotwasoverwhelming,evenonamodeldeployment level and without collecting thefullBSMmessageset.Howtomanageconnected vehicle data on a larger scale will be a challenge for public agencies in the future. The availability of probe data was expressed as a critical need of state and local agencies. If or when connectedvehicledatabecomesavailable,publicagencieswillneedtostorethedata,aggregatethedatawithothersimilardata,andanalyzethedatatoprovideusefulinformation.Currently,publicagencies have limited capabilities to undertake theseactivities.Theywillneedstaffwhoareskilled in data management and analytics to assist withperformancemonitoring,measurementanddecision support. It is likely that agencies will rely on the private sector for many of these services.

Forsomeagencies,suchastheMichiganDOTandtheRoadCommissionforOaklandCounty,roadweatherinformationiscriticalformaintenanceoperations,especiallyduringwintermonths.AccesstoBSMPart2datawouldgive them an additional source of road weather data to support their maintenance decisions. Currently,theyrelyagreatdealonweather

THE AVAILABILITY OF PROBE DATA WAS

EXPRESSED AS A CRITICAL NEED OF STATE

AND LOCAL AGENCIES.

Page 23: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  17

forecastingservices,Road-WeatherInformationSystemsandEnvironmentSensingStations(RWIS/ESS),andspecializedsensorsinstalledonmaintenance vehicles to help them make such decisions. It is unlikely they would abandon these otherreliablesourcesofdata,buttheadditionaldatafromBSMPart2wouldsupplementthecurrent sources and increase the reliability of the information they use to make decisions. Oneissueidentifiedduringtheinterviewprocessis the limited involvement of public agencies in the developmentoftheSAEJ2735standardmessageset.TheJ2735standardwasdevelopedprimarilybytheautoindustryfortheirpurposes.Publicagency data needs may not be fully addressed intheJ2735standard.Amorerobustdialoguebetween the auto industry and public agencies is needed to identify data elements of value to publicagencies.SomeofthisworkisbeingdonethroughtheV2IresearchcurrentlyunderwaybytheU.S.DOT,butitisevidentthatamoreinclusivediscussion would be useful to help public agencies understand the data that will be available to them and to help the industry refine the standard to meet data capture requirements for public agencies.TheavailabilityandpossibleexpansionofBSMdata,andtheaggregationofthosedatawithdata from other sources will be important for maintenance decision support systems in the future. The agencies likely will need outside supportfromtheU.S.DOTandconsultantswhenor if these data become available to public agencies.

Communications

Communicationsrequirementsforconnectedvehicle implementation are certainly a concern for publicagencies.Whilemanyagenciesowntheir

communicationsnetworks,somestillrelyonleasedcommunications circuits. This poses concerns relatedtonetworkcapacities,maintenancepriorities,technicalcapabilitiesofthirdpartyprovidersofcommunicationsservices,andnetworksecurity.Foragenciesthatowntheirnetworks,uncertainty about network capacity is a concern. TherequirementforIPv6becameanissueonSafetyPilot.ItwasachallengefortheSafetyPilotConductortofullyunderstandanddeployIPv6ontheCityofAnnArbornetwork.Nevertheless,IPv6wassuccessfullydeployedandoperationalontheCity’snetworkduringSafetyPilot.ThisdemonstratedthatIPv6maybe more easily deployed on private networks than on commercial networks at this time. Forexample,RSUsalongU.S.23andM-14wereto be integrated with other field devices installed bytheMichiganDOT.Cellularcommunicationsweretobedeployedatthosesites.Whilethecellular provider stated that they would be able to supportIPv6atthosesites,itwasdeterminedthatIPv6couldnotbesupportedbythecommercialcarrieraftermonthsofdelay.Anotherthirdpartycommunications provider was brought in to remedythesituation.Aftermanymoremonthsofdelay,theytoocouldnotsupportthisrequirement.These freeway sites were not implemented during thedeploymentphaseofSafetyPilotduetothedelaysthatresulted.Ultimately,itwasdecidedthatthreeRSUsitesalongU.S.23andM-14wouldberelayed via broadband wireless communications to anodeontheCityofAnnArbor’scommunicationsnetworkatU.S.23andPlymouthRoad.ThelessonlearnedisthatIPv6isnotwidelysupported by commercial communications providersatthistime.ItisanticipatedthatIPv6will be supported commercially within the next

A MORE ROBUST DIALOGUE BETWEEN THE AUTO INDUSTRY AND PUBLIC AGENCIES IS NEEDED TO

IDENTIFY DATA ELEMENTS OF VALUE TO PUBLIC AGENCIES.

Page 24: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  18

fiveyears.ThecurrentRSUspecificationassumesIPv6anddoesnotsupportIPv4SIMtunneling.Thisrequired“work-arounds”onSafetyPilot.Therefore,initialdeploymentswilllikelydependonsimilar“work-arounds”usingIPv4tunnelingorprivateclosednetworkresourcesuntilIPv6iscommerciallyviable.ThenewRSUspecificationbeingdevelopedbytheU.S.DOTwillincludebothIPv4tunnelingandIPv6compatibility.Backhaulcommunicationsalsoisaconcernforrural deployments for the reasons mentioned above. Most rural deployments will rely on leased communications because publicly installed and owned communications networks in rural areas are costly to build and maintain. Consequently,communicationscapabilitiesposea significant barrier to rural connected vehicle deployment.Connectedvehicledeploymentplans must take this into consideration.

Security Considerations

Securitymanagementwasexpressedasaconcernbyallrespondents,whoappeartoseethisissueasabarriertodeployment.Securityis a critical need for all connected vehicle transactions to ensure that only information fromtrustedsourcesissent,acceptedandused.Networksecurityiscurrentlybeingaddressedonan enterprise level by issuing security certificates

throughtheSecurityCertificateManagementSystem(SCMS).ThePublic-KeyInfrastructure(PKI)roleforcertificateauthoritywilllikelynotbehandledatthelocallevelinthefuture.Instead,itislikely that regional servers or security management systems will be distributed across the country and coordinated on a national basis. This was identified by the study participants as a key need and role fortheU.S.DOToranindependentthirdparty.Localagencystaffstillhadquestionsabouthowthe security management system would work. Arecertificatesdeliveredthroughthepubliclyownedinfrastructureoratautodealerships?Canthe cellular network be used for delivery of the certificatesratherthanusingRSUs?Itwasclearthatthe model for security management is yet unclear and needs to be defined prior to deployment.Localagenciesalsoexpressedadifferentconcernrelated to security of their local networks. If they receivedatadirectlyfromconnectedvehicles,then they must open up their network firewalls to accept such data. This poses the risk of network vulnerabilitytomaliciousbehavioror“badplayers.”Most of the public agencies involved in this study stated that some security concerns could bemitigatedifthirdpartydatabrokerscollect,aggregate,analyzeandconfigureconnectedvehicle data for public agencies in the future. Whilethismaysimplifythesecurityscenariosforlocalagenciesinthefuture,itmayalsocreate latencies in the retrieval of information and may have implications for how public agencies collect and use traffic data.

Planning for the Connected Vehicle Environment – Technical Issues

OptimizationoftheRSUnetworkisbothatechnicaland practical concern for public agencies. It is clear thatpublicagenciesmustplanfordeployment,but they currently lack information about how manydevicestheywillneed,wheretheyshouldbelocatedforoptimalbenefit,andbenefitsandcosts.

THE LESSON LEARNED IS THAT IPV6 IS

NOT WIDELY SUPPORTED BY COMMERCIAL

COMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS AT THIS TIME. IT

IS ANTICIPATED THAT IPV6 WILL BE SUPPORTED

COMMERCIALLY WITHIN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.

SECURITY MANAGEMENT WAS EXPRESSED

AS A CONCERN BY ALL RESPONDENTS.

Page 25: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  19

RSUcoveragemustbewell-plannedbylocalagenciestocontrolcosts,butalsotoavoidoverlapping coverage areas that could lead to data management and interpretation issues. ItwasfoundthattherangeofDSRCradiosvariesconsiderablygiventerrain,vegetation,andotherline-of-sightfeatures.Nevertheless,it also appears that the range of the radios maybegreaterthanthe300meterdistancegenerallyassumedpriortoSafetyPilotgivenclear line-of-sight. The extended range of theradioswasunexpectedonSafetyPilotandcertainly poses interesting challenges for future deployment.Atthispoint,theimpactsofavehiclecommunicatingwithmultipleRSUsarenotfullyknown.Sitingcriteriawillbeneededto assist local agencies in their planning.Sitingcriteriamusttakeintoconsiderationthegreater than expected broadcast range of the DSRCradios.ItispossiblethatfewerRSUsmay be needed along corridors or throughout ametropolitanarea.Agenciesmustconductanalysestodeterminecoverageneeds,tuneradiostoreducecoveragegapsoroverlaps,andassesssightlinesalongcorridors.Alloftheseactivities will have cost implications for agencies.The location of the devices will be determined bystateandlocalpriorities.Localagenciesstated that they will use crash and traffic data to determine locations where needs are greatest. Theyfeelthatthisapproach,whichisalreadyusedformostinvestmentdecisions,willprovidethegreatest benefits from the onset of the program. Allagenciesexpressedaneedforbenefitandcost information to justify the investment of public funds for connected vehicle technology. Most agencies indicated that they would proceed

cautiously until they could demonstrate the valueofdeploymenttothegeneralpublic,especially in light of resource limitations.

Institutional Challenges to Connected Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment

Publicagenciesinvolvedinthisstudyreportedsix major institutional challenges related to connectedvehicleinfrastructuredeployment.First,public agencies face funding shortfalls that will impact their ability to deploy connected vehicle infrastructure. This not only concerns capital costs fordeployment,butalsofundingforoperationand maintenance of the infrastructure. The second themeinvolvestheneedformorestaffwithnewskills. The ability of public agencies to hire and retainstaffwiththetechnicalskillsrequiredisaconsiderablechallengeforlocalagencies.Third,public agencies currently lack the benefit and cost information they require to support deployment decisions.Fourth,theydonotunderstandhowtoaccessthedata,whowillownthedata,andwhat the institutional environment will be like tosupporttheirinformationneeds.Fifth,publicagencies have no control over what vehicle manufacturers will do. They envision a dynamic environment that is unstable and will require continuous enhancements to the infrastructure to staycurrent.Standardsandbackwardcompatibilitywere two issues that public agencies feel are needed. Finally,publicagencieslackenoughinformationabout the business model for connected vehicle deployment to begin planning for a connected vehicleenvironment.Uncertaintyinstillsinertia,and most local agencies will wait until the path is clear before they proceed with deployment.

IT IS CLEAR THAT PUBLIC AGENCIES MUST PLAN FOR DEPLOYMENT, BUT THEY CURRENTLY LACK

INFORMATION ABOUT HOW MANY DEVICES THEY WILL NEED, WHERE THEY SHOULD BE LOCATED FOR

OPTIMAL BENEFIT, AND BENEFITS AND COSTS.

Page 26: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  20

Resource Requirements

Resource concerns dominate the institutional challenges expressed by public agencies. Their resourcesarealreadystrainedindeploying,operating and maintaining their current infrastructure.Addingmoreequipmentwithnewmaintenance requirements will exacerbate this issue. Fundingfordeployment,operationsandmaintenance was mentioned as the top concern forstateandlocalagencies.Agenciesexpresseduncertaintyregardingfuturefederalfundinglevels,competitionforfunding,andfundingeligibilityundercurrentfederalaidprograms.Whileagencystaffdidnotsupportaseparatefundingprogramforconnectedvehicledeployment,operationsandmaintenance,theydidsupporteligibilityundercurrent or future categorical programs for such activities. They also indicated that incentives may be required to encourage use of funds for connected vehicle implementation over other purposes.

Agenciesperceiveaneedforadditionalfundingto upgrade traffic signal control equipment in order to accommodate connected vehicle infrastructure.Additionally,thecostofmaintenanceof additional equipment was cited by all agencies as a concern. This concern related to field equipment,communicationsinfrastructure,andbackofficehardwareandsoftwaresystems.The agencies also perceive an opportunity for public-public and public-private partnerships to supportconnectedvehicledeployment,operationsand maintenance. Most of the agencies cited the opportunity to form partnerships with local transit andpublicsafetyagencies.Othersbelievethat

private,third-partyorganizationswilldetermineaviablebusinessmodeltosupportdeployment,maintenanceandoperations.Nevertheless,allagencies recognize that the viability of connected vehicle infrastructure will depend on partnerships thatcoverfederal,state,regionalandlocalgovernments along with the private sector.

Technical Skills and Experience

The interview respondents all consider themselves to be sophisticated users and pioneers in connected vehicletechnology.Therefore,theyarepredisposedto technical challenges involved in deploying the technologyandhavestaffwiththetechnicalskillsrequiredforimplementation.However,theyfearthatstaffretentionwillposeproblemsforthemasdeploymenttakesplace.Wageratesforhighlyskilledtechnicalstaffareconsiderablyloweratpublic agencies than in the private sector. They anticipatestaffshortagesforhighlyskilledtechnicalresourcesrequiredforbackofficesupport,networkmanagementandsecurity,datamanagement,testing and application development support. Consequently,mostoftherespondentsbelievethatthey will rely more on consultants and contractors tosupporttheseaspectsofdeployment,operationsand maintenance of their systems in the future.

Benefit and Cost Information

Sinceconnectedvehicletechnologyhasonlybeendeployedintestbeds,benefitandcostinformationisscarce.However,theU.S.DOTisexpectedtofinalizeitsanalysisofSafety

THE AVAILABILITY OF PROBE DATA WAS

EXPRESSED AS A CRITICAL NEED OF STATE

AND LOCAL AGENCIES.

THEY ANTICIPATE STAFF SHORTAGES FOR

HIGHLY SKILLED TECHNICAL RESOURCES

REQUIRED FOR BACK OFFICE SUPPORT,

NETWORK MANAGEMENT AND SECURITY, DATA

MANAGEMENT, TESTING AND APPLICATION

DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT.

Page 27: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  21

Pilotdataandreleaseareport,includingestimatesofcostsandbenefits,inearly2014.Preliminaryanalysesindicatedthatconnectedvehicle technology could address more than80percentofvehicularcrashscenariosinvolvingunimpaireddrivers.Whilepublicagencies do not question the potential safety benefitsofV2Vapplications,theyalsodonotunderstand the incremental safety benefits that can be achieved by the implementation ofconnectedvehicleinfrastructureandV2Isafetyapplications.Continuingresearchandevaluationwillberequired,evenafterdeepmarketpenetrationofconnectedvehicles,tounderstandtheaddedbenefitsofV2Icapabilities.

Data Access and Ownership

The public agencies involved in this study feel that the data from connected vehicles will yield the greatest benefits for their organizations in the short-term.However,theyexpressedfrustrationregarding limited access to the data from the connected vehicle test bed programs. Either the data is not yet available to the agencies in ausableformat,orthedataisproprietaryandunavailableforpublicagencyuse.Someagenciesareequippingtheirfleetswithvarioussensorstoobtainroadandweatherconditioninformation,even though some of this information may alreadybeavailabledirectlyfromBSMPart2.Asmentionedpreviously,therespondentsfeltthat greater public agency participation is needed torefinetheJ2735standardtoincludedata

elements in a format that will be useful for public agency purposes. This will require greater public agency participation on standards committees and greater collaboration with private industry to define the data needs of public agencies.

Intheshortterm,publicagenciescouldusethedatafrom connected vehicle test programs to help them:

• Understand the substance and format of the data

• Understand the benefits of the technology

• Identify ways to use the data to meet their operational needs

• Establish performance metrics or determine problem locations on their transportation networks

• Developtheirconnectedvehicleinfrastructuredeployment site plans

• Educatetheirstaffanddecision-makersondatauses and the value of the technology

Longerterm,asmarketpenetrationofconnectedvehiclesincreasesandmoredataisavailable,publicagencieswillfacedifferentchallenges.Dataownershipissuesmustbeaddressedaspartof future policy making. Is the data generated by connected vehicles part of the public domain? If so,whichdata?Ifnot,thenwhoownsthedataand how can public agencies access that data?

Most of the public agencies expressed a concern that they could become overwhelmed with data. They stated that it may be more beneficial for a thirdpartytocollect,store,process,aggregate,and analyze the data for them. This will help them overcome challenges they envision related to skilled IT personnel and back office resource needs. It may alsohelpthemfromaliabilityperspective.Noneofthe agencies expressed a desired to respond to more requestsundertheFreedomofInformationAct(FOIA).Manyofthepublicagencyrepresentativesmentioned that they are already procuring information from third parties for performance measurement and decision support. This appears to be a preferred model for public agencies.

CONTINUING RESEARCH AND EVALUATION

WILL BE REQUIRED, EVEN AFTER DEEP MARKET

PENETRATION OF CONNECTED VEHICLES, TO

UNDERSTAND THE ADDED BENEFITS OF V2I

CAPABILITIES.

Page 28: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  22

Standards and Stability of the Environment

Most public agencies recognize that currently installed connected vehicle infrastructure represents a prototype version and that additional development is required. They also recognize that much of this development is out of their control. They identified a need for public agencies to work in concert with traffic control equipment manufacturers,connectedvehicleequipmentsuppliers,andautomakerstoprovideamorestableenvironment for connected vehicle deployment. Untiltheysensestabilityintheenvironment,most agencies will lack sufficient confidence to move into the connected vehicle space. Someoftheagenciesofferedaninterestingperspective that the environment may never becomestable–thattechnologicaladvanceswillmake it increasingly difficult for them to settle on a technology. They fear obsolescence will render their infrastructure obsolete too quickly to realize a satisfactory return on investment. They emphasized the need for technology-agnostic solutions that facilitate forward and backward compatibility. Acoupleofagencyrepresentativesstatedthat“thesoonerthetechnologyisinthehandsofpractitioners,thesooneritwillevolve.”Thereisanecdotalevidencethatthismightbethecase.Forexample,videodetectiontechnologywasintroducedfortrafficcontrolpurposesintheearly1990’s.Initialdeviceslackedtechnicalmaturity,andproblemsbecameevidentonlyaftersufficientnumbersofthedevicesweredeployed.Soon,shadowprocessing and directional detection capabilities wereintroduced,andlocalagenciesgainedgreaterconfidenceinthetechnology.However,iftheinitial

users of the technology did not take those first steps,itispossiblethattechnicalmaturationandadoption rates would have been much slower.The stability of the environment is based onmanyfactors,buthavingasetofmaturestandards is the key to technology adoption.

Planning for the Connected Vehicle Environment – Institutional Issues

Planningofconnectedvehicleinfrastructurewilltakeplaceatthestate,regionalandlocallevels,notatthefederallevel.Thiswillrequireanunderstandingofthetechnology,thebenefits,thecosts,theusesforthedata,andtheapplications.It will also require funding availability. Most of the public agencies feel they have time to plan for a connected vehicle environment. They understand that connected vehicle infrastructure will likely lag behind connected vehicle penetration foravarietyofreasons,alreadymentionedinthisreport.However,continueduncertaintyaboutthebusinessmodelforconnectedvehicledeployment,operation and maintenance is creating inertia among public agencies seeking answers about howtheymustadjust.Whilemostagenciesdonotenvision radical changes in the structure of their organizationsbecauseofconnectedvehicles,theydoenvision changes in various functions within their organizations,suchasdatamanagement.Publicagencies already contract many functions previously performedinternally,sothisiscommonpracticeintoday’senvironment.Whilemorefunctionsmaybecontractedout,thepublicagenciesstillwillneedskilled contract managers who understand those functions and the technologies they are based upon.Publicagenciesallenvisiongreaterefficiencyin their business operations with improved information in the future. They will be able to morequicklypinpointtrafficproblems,vehiclemaintenanceissues,orpoorroadsurfaceconditions. They may need to adjust current processes to take advantage of more and faster

UNTIL THEY SENSE STABILITY IN THE

ENVIRONMENT, MOST AGENCIES WILL LACK

SUFFICIENT CONFIDENCE TO MOVE INTO THE

CONNECTED VEHICLE SPACE.

Page 29: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  23

information.Decision-supportsystemsmayneedtoberevampedasaresult.Nevertheless,without knowledge of how the technology will berolledoutorwhowillownthedata,mostpublic agencies will sit on the sidelines.Greaterpublicawarenesswillberequiredtoovercome misconceptions about connected vehicle technology. Even within public agencies involved inconnectedvehicletestprograms,misinformationiscommon.Communicationsandoutreachwillbeneeded to educate the public about the benefits and costsofconnectedvehicletechnology,especiallywhen public funds are used for deployment.

CONCLUSION

Deploymentofconnectedvehicleinfrastructurewilltakeplaceatthestateandlocallevel,butbeguidedbyfederalpolicy.AstepinthisdirectionwastakenonFebruary3,2014,whentheU.S.DOTannouncedtheirintenttomoveforwardwith the regulatory process related to connected vehiclesafetyinlightvehicles.AccordingtotheU.S.DOTpressreleaseregardingtheagencyannouncement,the“DOTbelievesthatthesignal this announcement sends to the market will significantly enhance development of this technology and pave the way for market penetrationofV2Vsafetyapplications.”Theagencydecisionsentamessagetoautomakers,thesuppliercommunity,connectedvehicleapplicationdevelopers,andgovernmentagenciesthat policy and guidance will be forthcoming at a future date. This decision has been expected formanymonths,butwiththeannouncementcomes a greater sense of confidence that

connected vehicle technology will become a reality before the end of the decade.Manychallenges,bothtechnicalandinstitutional,must be overcome to realize the benefits of this promising technology. Technical challenges facing practitioners include the technical maturityandrobustnessoftheequipment,interoperability,standards,applicationdevelopment,security,andcommunications.Publicagencieswillneedtoadapttothechanging technical environment by developing or hiring skilled professionals in information technology,networking,anddataanalytics.Ontheinstitutionalfront,thechallengesseemeven more daunting. Uncertainty will instill a senseofinertia,andinfrastructuredeploymentwill lag without guidance on data management andownershipissues,standards,businessmodels,andfundingoptions.Informationonbenefits and costs will be needed to help state and local agencies justify their investment decisions.Communicationsandoutreachwillbe needed to foster greater understanding of the technologyandthevalueitofferstothepublic.It is clear that the world is on the verge of a transformational era in transportation safety. It is highly probable that this transformation will createancillarybenefitsinmobility,environmentalsustainability,andevennewfundingmechanisms.The key to realizing this transformation is to systematicallyaddresstheissues,bothrealandperceived,identifiedbythepractitionercommunity.Whatwillthebusinessmodelfordeploymentlooklike?Howwillitberolledoutandwhen?Publicagenciesmustworkwiththeirstakeholderstounderstandtheirneedsandfears,butalsotoestablish realistic expectations about connected vehicletechnology.Whilethenationmaybeon the verge of transformational changes in transportation,theprogramcouldbesidelinedby technical failures or public misconceptions. Ultimately,connectedvehicletechnologycould

GREATER PUBLIC AWARENESS WILL BE

REQUIRED TO OVERCOME MISCONCEPTIONS

ABOUT CONNECTED VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY.

Page 30: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  24

bethe“game-changer”thatwasenvisionedbytheU.S.DOTandtheautomakersmorethanadecadeago.Asthetransformationoccurs,newmethodsfortrafficsignaltiming,trafficanalyses,androadwaydesigncriteriawillneedtoadapt.Currentengineeringandoperationalconcepts,algorithms,ourtransportationworkforce,andtrafficcontrolsystemswillgothroughsignificantchanges.Adaptationwillbedifficult,especiallyinanageofseverelylimitedresources.However,asoneresponderpointedout,“Thebookisbeingrewritten.”

Page 31: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  25

REFERENCES

1. SafetyPilotwebsite,http://www.safetypilot.us/,UniversityofMichiganTransportationResearchCenter,AnnArbor,Michigan.

2. “AASHTOConnectedVehicleInfrastructureDeploymentAnalysis,”AmericanAssociationofStateHighwayandTransportationOfficialsfortheResearchandInnovativeTechnologyAdministration,USDepartmentofTransportation,June2011.

3. “AASHTOConnectedVehicleFieldInfrastructureFootprintAnalysis–ApplicationsAnalysis,”AmericanAssociationofStateHighwayandTransportationOfficials,July2013.

4. “VehicleInformationExchangeNeedsforMobilityApplications:Version2.0,”FHWAReportNumberFHWA-JPO-12-021,MichaelMcGurrin,Noblis,August2012.

5. “NationalConnectedVehicleFieldInfrastructureFootprintAnalysis-DeploymentConcepts,”AmericanAssociationofStateHighwayandTransportationOfficials,September2013.

6. “EstimateofCapitalInvestmentRequirementsandOngoingOperatingandMaintenanceCosts,”AmericanAssociationofStateHighwayandTransportationOfficials,December2013.

7. “AASHTONationalConnectedVehicleFieldInfrastructureFootprintAnalysis–ProjectStatusUpdate,”PresentationattheConnectedVehiclePublicMeetingbyBenMcKeeverandJimWright,Arlington,VA.,September2013.

8. “AdvancedMicrosystemsforAutomotiveApplications,”H.Rehborn,B.S.Derner,R.P.Schafer,2012.9. “LinkTravelTimeEstimationBasedonVehicleInfrastructureIntegrationProbeData,”ZhijunZou,MengLi,and

FanpingBu,TenthInternationalConferenceofChineseTransportationProfessionals(ICCTP),Beijing,China,August4-8,2010,publishedbyASCE.

10. “MobilityProgramUpdate,”Presentationatthe2011ITETechnicalConferencebyBenMcKeever,U.S.DOT/FHWAOfficeofOperations,LakeBuenaVista,FL.,April2011.

11. “VehicletoInfrastructureCommunications-TransformSurfaceTransportationSafety,MobilityandEnvironmentalPerformance,”PresentationattheConnectedVehiclePublicMeetingbyCarlAnderson,U.S.DOT/FHWAOfficeofSafetyResearchandDevelopment,Arlington,VA.,September2013.

12. “ExecutingtheVehicle-to-InfrastructureResearchProgram:EnablingTechnology,”PresentationattheConnectedVehiclePublicMeetingbyDebCurtis,U.S.DOT/FHWAOfficeofSafetyResearchandDevelopment,Arlington,VA.,September2013.

13. “OverviewofV2ISafetyApplications,”PresentationattheConnectedVehiclePublicMeetingbyGregDavis,U.S.DOT/FHWAOfficeofSafetyResearchandDevelopment,Arlington,VA.,September2013.

14. “FHWA2015V2IDeploymentGuidance,”PresentationattheConnectedVehiclePublicMeetingbyBobRupert,U.S.DOT/FHWAOfficeofSafetyResearchandDevelopment,Arlington,VA.,September2013.

15. SafetyPilotLessonsLearnedLog,Version1.6,UniversityofMichiganTransportationResearchCenter,AnnArbor,Michigan,March2013.

16. “SafetyPilotModelDeploymentLessonsLearned,”PresentationattheConnectedVehiclePublicMeetingbyKevinGay,U.S.DOT/RITA,Arlington,VA.,September2013.

Page 32: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  26

17. “SecurityCredentialManagementSystemDesign-Securitysystemdesignforcooperativevehicle-to-vehiclecrashavoidanceapplicationsusing5.9GHzDedicatedShortRangeCommunications(DSRC)wirelesscommunications,”Draftreport,WaltFehr,U.S.DOT/RITA,April2012.

18. “SystemRequirementDescription-5.9GHzDSRCRoadsideEquipmentDeviceSpecification,”Version3.0,WaltFehr,U.S.DOT/RITA,March2012.

19. “VisionfortheSoutheastMichiganConnectedVehicleTestBed2014,”PresentationviawebinarbyWaltFehr,U.S.DOT/RITA,SoutheastMichiganConnectedVehicleTestBed2014ProjectPublicMeeting,October2013.

20. “ConnectedVehicleReferenceImplementationArchitecture,”http://www.iteris.com/cvria/index.html,UpdatedDecember2013.

21. “MichiganConnectedVehicleTestBedUpdate,”PresentedattheITSMichiganQuarterlyMeetingbyGregKrueger,ConnectedVehicleProgramManager,Leidos,December2013.

general References

• “IntelligentTransportationSystems:Vehicle-to-VehicleTechnologiesExpectedtoOfferSafetyBenefits,butaVarietyofDeploymentChallengesExist,”ReporttoCongressionalRequesters,UnitedStatesGovernmentAccountingOffice,GAO-14-13,November2013.

• http://www.its.dot.gov/testbed.htm• CooperativeTransportationSystemsPooledFundStudy,http://cts.virginia.edu/CTSPFS_1.html

Page 33: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  A-1

APPENDIX A

Interview Questionnaires

Page 34: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

[this page intentionally left blank]

Page 35: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  A-3

PRACTIONER QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Whatdoyou,asapractitioner,feelisthegreatestbenefitthatwillbederivedfromconnectedvehicletechnology?2. Whatspecificapplicationsofconnectedvehicletechnologywillhelpyouragencyachieveyourorganizational

goalsandthegreatestbenefits?Pleasedescribe.3. Whatdothinkarethegreatestimpedimentstowidespreaddeploymentofconnectedvehicletechnology?4. WhatdeploymentchallengesdidyoufaceontheSafetyPilotprogram?5. Whatmaintenanceandoperationalchallengeshaveyoufacedrelatedtoconnectedvehicleinfrastructure?6. Whatinstitutionalchallengesdidyoufaceduringthedeploymentofconnectedvehicletechnology?7. Basedonyourexperience,whattechnicalchallengesposethegreatestriskorbarrierstofuturedeployment?8. Basedonyourexperience,whatinstitutionalchallengesposethegreatestriskorbarrierstofuturedeployment?9. Whatskills,knowledgeandexperienceareneededtosuccessfullydeployandmanageconnectedvehicleinfrastructure?

a. Whatskills,knowledgeandexperiencewouldbeneededbystafffordeployment?b. Whatskills,knowledgeandexperiencewouldbeneededbystaffforoperationsandmaintenance?

10. Whatotherresourcesdoyouhaveavailabletosupportthisreport(e.g.,wiringdiagrams,intersectionplansheets,technicalspecifications,specialprovisions,technicaldocumentation,etc.)?

11. Whoelseshouldwemeetwithtoobtaininformationforthisreport?

CONSULTANT QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Whatdoyou,asaconsultantexpert,feelisthegreatestbenefitthatwillbederivedfromconnectedvehicletechnology?

2. Whatspecificapplicationsofconnectedvehicletechnologywillhelppublicagenciesachievetheirorganizationalgoalsandthegreatestbenefits?Pleasedescribe.

3. Whatdothinkarethegreatestimpedimentstowidespreaddeploymentofconnectedvehicletechnology?4. WhatdeploymentchallengesdidyoufaceontheSafetyPilotprogram?5. Whatmaintenanceandoperationalchallengeshaveyoufacedrelatedtoconnectedvehicleinfrastructure?6. Whatinstitutionalchallengesdidyoufaceduringthedeploymentofconnectedvehicletechnology?7. Basedonyourexperience,whattechnicalchallengesposethegreatestriskorbarrierstofuturedeployment?8. Basedonyourexperience,whatinstitutionalchallengesposethegreatestriskorbarrierstofuturedeployment?9. Whatskills,knowledgeandexperienceareneededtosuccessfullydeployandmanageconnectedvehicleinfrastructure?

a. Whatskills,knowledgeandexperiencewouldbeneededbystafffordeployment?b. Whatskills,knowledgeandexperiencewouldbeneededbystaffforoperationsandmaintenance?

10. Whatotherresourcesdoyouhaveavailabletosupportthisreport(e.g.,wiringdiagrams,intersectionplansheets,technicalspecifications,specialprovisions,technicaldocumentation,etc.)?

11. Whoelseshouldwemeetwithtoobtaininformationforthisreport?

Page 36: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

[this page intentionally left blank]

Page 37: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  B-1

APPENDIX B

Typical Highway RSU Installation Plans

Page 38: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  B-2

Page 39: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  B-3

Page 40: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  B-4

Page 41: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  B-5

Page 42: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  B-6

Page 43: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  B-7

Page 44: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  B-8

Page 45: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  B-9

Page 46: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  B-10

Page 47: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  B-11

Page 48: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  B-12

Page 49: CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE ......CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS: Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs p ׀

CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Lessons Learned from Safety Pilot and Other Connected Vehicle Test Programs

p ׀  B-13