submitted to: minnesota department of transportation (mn/dot)

Submitted by:

ITS INNOVATIVE IDEA PROJECT ARTERIAL TRAVEL TIME MONITORING SYSTEM

USING BLUETOOTH TECHNOLOGY Final Report

Submitted to: Minnesota Department of Transportation

(Mn/DOT)

March 2011

19‐J09‐1911

Arterial Travel Time Monitoring System Using Bluetooth Technology Version 3

Page i Minnesota Department of Transportation ITS Innovative Idea Project

Arterial Travel Time Monitoring Using Bluetooth Technology Final Report

DOCUMENT VERSION CONTROL

Document Name Submittal Date Version No. Version 1.0 January 2011 1 Version 1.02 February 2011 2 Version 1.03 March 2011 3


Page ii Minnesota Department of Transportation ITS Innovative Idea Project


GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS AC – Alternating Current AP – Access Point BT ‐ Bluetooth dBi – Decibel Isotropic DC – Direct Current DNS – Domain Name System DSRC – Dedicated Short Range Communication Ghz ‐ Gigahertz GPS – Global Positioning System ITS – Intelligent Transportation Systems kbps – Kilobytes Per Second LAMP – Software including Linux, Apache, MySQL, and PHP LAN – Local Area Network MAC – Media Access Control ms ‐ Millisecond NTP – Network Time Protocol OS – Operating System PHP – Hypertext Preprocessor RF – Radio Frequency RSU – Road Side Units TCP/IP – Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol


Page iii Minnesota Department of Transportation ITS Innovative Idea Project


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Document Version Control ....................................................................................................... i

Glossary of Acronyms .............................................................................................................. ii

Table of Contents ................................................................................................................... iii

List of Tables........................................................................................................................... iv

List of Figures ......................................................................................................................... iv

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. v

1.0 Project Background ............................................................................................ 1

1.1 PROJECT PARTNERS ........................................................................................................ 1 1.2 CSAH 81 CORRIDOR LOCATIONS ...................................................................................... 2

2.0 Arterial Bluetooth System Design ....................................................................... 4

2.1 SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................. 4 2.2 BLUETOOTH SYSTEM HARDWARE ...................................................................................... 7 2.3 BLUETOOTH SYSTEM SOFTWARE AND USER INTERFACE ......................................................... 7 2.4 COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM ............................................................................................. 7

3.0 Bluetooth System Data Collection and Evaluation Process ................................. 8

3.1 DATA COLLECTION ACTIVITIES .......................................................................................... 9 3.1.1 Travel Time Runs ...................................................................................................... 9 3.1.2 Directional Tube (Volume) Counts .......................................................................... 12 3.1.3 StreetWAVE Device Data ........................................................................................ 12 StreetWAVE MAC Addresses ................................................................................................. 12 3.1.4 Data Filtering and Smoothing ................................................................................ 13

3.2 DATA COMPARISON METHODOLOGY ............................................................................... 16 3.2.1 Data Comparison .................................................................................................... 17 3.2.2 Trend Analysis ......................................................................................................... 19

4.0 Summary of Evaluation Results ........................................................................ 27

5.0 System Hardware/Software Operational and Maintenance Costs .................... 28

6.0 Project Summary/Next Steps ........................................................................... 30


Page iv Minnesota Department of Transportation ITS Innovative Idea Project


LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1. BLUETOOTH/WI‐FI INTERFERENCE TEST RESULTS ........................................................ 8 TABLE 2. FIELD MEASURED TRAVEL TIME STUDY SUMMARY – NORTHBOUND ....................... 10 TABLE 3. FIELD MEASURED TRAVEL TIME STUDY SUMMARY – SOUTHBOUND........................ 11 TABLE 4. AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC FOR EACH NODE ................................................................. 12 TABLE 5. STREETWAVE TRAVEL TIME DATA – NORTHBOUND .................................................. 14 TABLE 6. STREETWAVE TRAVEL TIME DATA – SOUTHBOUND .................................................. 15 TABLE 7. TRAVEL TIME VERIFICATION AND COMPARISON ....................................................... 18 TABLE 8. OCTOBER 13, 2010 STREETWAVE TRAVEL TIME DATA TO TRAVEL TIME STUDY COMPARISON – NORTHBOUND .................................................................................................... 23 TABLE 9. OCTOBER 13, 2010 STREETWAVE TRAVEL TIME DATA TO TRAVEL TIME STUDY COMPARISON – NORTHBOUND .................................................................................................... 24 TABLE 10. OCTOBER 13, 2010 STREETWAVE TRAVEL TIME DATA TO TRAVEL TIME STUDY COMPARISON – SOUTHBOUND .................................................................................................... 25 TABLE 11. OCTOBER 13, 2010 STREETWAVE TRAVEL TIME DATA TO TRAVEL TIME STUDY COMPARISON – SOUTHBOUND .................................................................................................... 26 TABLE 12. ARTERIAL BLUETOOTH PROJECT HARDWARE/SOFTWARE COSTS .............................. 28

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1: STREETWAVE LOCATIONS ALONG CSAH 81 .................................................................. 3 FIGURE 2: STREETWAVE INSTALLATION AND HARDWARE............................................................ 5 FIGURE 3: SPEED LIMIT CHANGES ALONG CSAH 81 .................................................................... 17 FIGURE 4: BLUETOOTH TRAVEL TIME SUMMARY FOR CONSTRUCTION RELATED ACTIVITY ...... 20 FIGURE 5: OCTOBER 13TH SEGMENT LEVEL COMPARISON .......................................................... 21 APPENDICES Appendix A ‐ 3G Wireless Field Test Results Appendix B ‐ Maintenance Log Sheets Appendix C ‐ System Acceptance Test Results Appendix D ‐ StreetWAVE Travel Time Result Validity Appendix E ‐ Website Travel Times with Field Measured Travel Times


Page v Minnesota Department of Transportation ITS Innovative Idea Project


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project Overview The Arterial Travel Time Monitoring System Using Bluetooth Technology project along CSAH 81 was selected by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) as a demonstration project for the 2009-2010 ITS Innovative Idea Program. The goals of the project are:

• To provide an operational test of an end-to-end solution that will result in accurate and reliable information on arterial travel times.

• To evaluate the results with respect to actual travel times and other various parameters (e.g., sample size).

• To demonstrate how the travel time information may be used as a performance measure for arterial traffic management and operations, and how it might be disseminated as traveler information (e.g., displayed on Google maps).

• To derive practical deployment guidelines as well as a nucleus for subsequent expansion of the technology in Hennepin County, in Minnesota or in other states.

A traditional systems engineering approach was used to prepare a project Concept of Operations, set of detailed system requirements and overall system design. Field and operational tests were conducted prior to the installation of field equipment in order to measure communications bandwidth strength and desired network operational characteristics. In May 2010 eight Savari Networks (8) StreetWAVE units were installed and deployed along CSAH 81 at six (6) intersections. The readers tracked Media Access Control (MAC) addresses emitted from Bluetooth devices traveling along the CSAH 81 corridor and stored the gathered information into a Savari-hosted website, which utilized a software application to match MAC addresses with respective time stamps from each of the six corridor nodes. The results of the field matches were displayed on the website in a variety of formats and via a graphical interface for further data interpolation by system users. From the information provided through the website, system users were able to calculate corridor segment-by-segment travel times (in seconds) over a 24-hour period of time on a historical basis between May 2010 and January 2011. Data was transmitted by StreetWAVE readers to the server in California via a 3G wireless network provided by a third-party communications vendor. The project’s evaluation phase began in May 2010 and was completed by the end of January 2011. Bluetooth Data Collection Process In order to effectively determine whether the data collected by the StreetWAVE units was accurate, the consultant used the following techniques to collect comparative data for further analysis:

• Review of existing traffic information along CSAH 81 provided by Hennepin County.


Page vi Minnesota Department of Transportation ITS Innovative Idea Project


• Collection of traffic data, including volume and travel times along the CSAH 81 corridor, prior to system deployment and during system deployment, in order to compare manually collected data against StreetWAVE data collected from Bluetooth devices traveling through the CSAH 81 corridor.

• Collection of StreetWAVE device data, including individual MAC addresses from known Bluetooth devices traveling along the CSAH 81 corridors, as well as time-stamped information on the first and the last time a particular device was detected within the range of one Bluetooth receiver.

• Analysis of compared data in a number of ways, including average speed, number of Bluetooth matches, standard deviation and percentage of speed differential between the two sets of data. Other anomalies related to corridor conditions (i.e., construction along the corridor, traffic incidents, etc.) were also noted as they occurred.

Travel Time Runs and Directional Volume Counts The consultant conducted travel time runs along CSAH 81 between Greenhaven Drive (northern node) and 36th Avenue (southern node) over a twelve hour period on midweek days between 6:30 AM and 6:30 PM in May, September and October 2010. The field measured travel time runs were performed using GPS software to calculate each travel time run and average speeds along the CSAH 81 corridor. Travel time runs were summarized for three daily periods: AM Peak (6:30-9:00 AM), Off-PeaK (9:01 AM-3:00 PM), and PM Peak (3:01 PM-6:30 PM). Directional tube counts were also placed in selected locations along CSAH 81 at the same time the travel times were being performed to determine traffic volumes at each node. This was done in order to eventually determine what percentage of the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) count the StreetWAVE device was able to identify at each corridor location. Please refer to Table 4 in the report for more information. StreetWAVE Device Data The StreetWAVE device collects MAC) addresses of Bluetooth-enabled devices to calculate travel times for vehicles that are traveling along an arterial corridor. Any Bluetooth device located contained within the vehicle (i.e. laptop, or cell phone) or installed as part of the vehicle’s platform will provide a unique and anonymous 48 bit “signature” that can be read by the StreetWAVE unit as the Bluetooth-enabled device moves into and through the reader’s operational zone. Savari Networks created a simple algorithm to mask actual MAC addresses collected as part of the project. To ensure the accuracy of the demonstrated system, a Bluetooth device with a known MAC address was used during each run of travel times performed along the CSAH 81 corridor during the project. Iteris staff independently verified and tracked the specific device’s MAC address through the website t during the travel time runs. StreetWAVE Travel Time Data Once the travel time runs were completed, data was pulled from the Savari website (http://minneapolis.savarinetworks.com). The data downloaded from the interface is provided in seconds. To better understand the information’s relevance to traffic conditions, travel times were converted to segment speed by taking the length of the segment divided by the time it took to traverse that segment length. This was done to provide a simpler means to review the data.

http://minneapolis.savarinetworks.com/


Page vii

Minnesota Department of Transportation ITS Innovative Idea Project

Data Filtering and Smoothing When a Bluetooth device is within the range of a sensor, a record containing the MAC ID and the timestamp is created. The records are continuously accumulated until the device goes out of range of the sensor. When the device goes out of range, then the accumulated records are aggregated into one single record. This record contains the timestamp when the device was first seen, when it was last seen, and how often is had been seen. If the same device comes within range of the sensor after a time gap of 60 seconds, a new set of records is created and aggregated. The new aggregate record is distinct from the previous record.

Travel times that are calculated between different locations can be filtered and smoothed using the website. The filtering options allow to only display travel times below a user definable ‘max time’ (between 1 and 360 minutes), and to eliminate the last 5% of travel times within a distribution of data based on the frequency of occurrence of a particular travel time. Savari provided an initial filter that is unbounded and eliminates sample sets based on the 95th percentile long-tail distribution. After the data was filtered, the average travel time was calculated and shown in Tables 5 and 6 of this report. Data Comparison Methodology Raw data was pulled from the Bluetooth server database for the same 24-hour period that the field measured travel times were collected to provide a methodology for comparison of travel time information. Upon initial review, the data needed to be filtered to eliminate outliers. Outliers consist of database travel times that are outside the range of normal activity. Unusually long and short travel times were eliminated from the database with a simple filter based on the posted speed limit. The filtering methodology bound both ends of the distributed data. The establishment of the upper bound is based upon the theory that vehicles (and their associated travel time) will not travel faster than 120% of the posted speed limit. The lower bound is established by theorizing that vehicles will not travel slower than 20% of the posted speed limit. For example, if the posted speed limit along a segment of the corridor was 55 mph, the usable travel times from the Bluetooth database would be filtered based on the upper and lower limits determined by the segment length and the speed range between 11 mph and 66 mph (.20 x 55 and 1.20 x 55). Performance Measurement The NCHRP 20-7 Guide to Benchmarking Operations Performance Measure identified travel time as a foremost indicator of the quality of traffic flow. The Federal Highway Administration is looking to incorporate economic analysis and performance measures to maximize financial resources. The use of timely, consistent and accurate travel time information along arterial corridors could provide a performance measure for agencies to evaluate a large number of enhancements and determine the return on the investment. Transportation agencies are asked to provide increased information regarding the quality of service that is provided along their roadways. Annual report cards are providing performance measures that summarize:

• Roadway Services Index • Roadway Safety Index



Page viii

Minnesota Department of Transportation ITS Innovative Idea Project


• Emissions Index • Transit Services Index

Currently, arterial travel time information is used to document “before” and “after” conditions for signal timing projects. Bluetooth readers can provide this information without the need for staff to perform multiple peak period travel time runs. Additionally, if data collectors are deployed along multiple arterials that provided continuous travel time information, traffic engineers could monitor the travel time along a corridor (weekly, monthly, annually) and proactively identify corridors that could benefit from signal timing modifications. Rather than evaluating traffic volume trends to identify an impacted corridor, actual travel time could be used to manage corridors which are experiencing increased levels of congestion. The monitoring of improved or degraded arterial travel times along a corridor can provide an input into the measurement of air quality and other metrics that are now used to determine regional priorities for various projects seeking to use Congestion Management Air Quality (CMAQ) funds. Project Findings One of the specific goals of this project was to determine if Bluetooth technology could be used to accurately estimate travel times along an arterial corridor. Based on the evaluation of a number of comparative analyses of data resulting from this project, that question can be answered affirmatively. However, this does not mean that an agency can just plug and play with this type of system. The goal of this project was not to develop the perfect algorithm that most accurately adjusts Bluetooth-sampled travel times to field-measured travel times. The results of this study show that Bluetooth data can be used in future traffic applications to publish arterial travel times to an ATIS web site. When evaluating the Bluetooth system as a means to sample and report arterial travel time, one must consider the operational characteristics of the corridor that is to be monitored. In general, the standard deviation is consistently higher for Bluetooth data sets when compared to travel time data. This is to be expected, because the field measured travel time data represents a through movement along the corridor during each run, whereas the Bluetooth data also includes drivers entering and exiting along the CSAH 81 corridor. Additionally, Bluetooth data represents a greater number of drivers, each having a unique set of driver characteristics, which is a different scenario than that of a trained technician trying to drive the corridor with the “platoon” or representing the average driver. Bluetooth travel time samples make up for this variance of technique by providing a higher total sampling size of travel time runs. Because the range of operating speeds varies greatly along arterial corridors, additional study will be needed to better relate Bluetooth data to the current traditional travel time methodologies. Future applications should consider the best way in which to report or summarize arterial travel time information for the general public.


Page 1 Mn/DOT ITS Innovative Idea Project


1.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND The Arterial Travel Time Monitoring System Using Bluetooth Technology (the Project) project along CSAH 81 was selected by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) as part of the 2009‐2010 ITS Innovative Idea Program. The goals of the project are:

• To provide an operational test of an end‐to‐end solution that will result in accurate and reliable information on arterial travel times.

• To evaluate the results with respect to actual travel times and other various parameters (e.g., sample size).

• To demonstrate how the travel time information may be used as a performance measure for arterial traffic management and operations, and how it might be disseminated as traveler information (e.g., displayed on Google maps).

• To derive practical deployment guidelines as well as a nucleus for subsequent expansion of the technology in Hennepin County, in Minnesota or in other states.

The Bluetooth readers used for the Project, known by the name “StreetWAVE”, are manufactured by Savari Networks, LLC. The StreetWAVE readers track Media Access Control (MAC) addresses emitted from Bluetooth devices in vehicles traveling along CSAH 81 and store the gathered information in a web interface/server operated by Savari. Each StreetWAVE reader uses a Bluetooth antenna to capture MAC addresses, which are then sent to a server over a 3G wireless network. A software application on this server matches the addresses and their respective time stamp to the exact same MAC address from any Bluetooth node along the corridor. The result is the ability to calculate travel time from one device to another. In May 2010, eight (8) StreetWAVE units were placed along CSAH 81 at the six (6) intersections shown in Figure 1. The evaluation of the Project began in May 2010 and was completed by the end of January 2011.

1.1 PROJECT PARTNERS The Project partners for the Arterial Travel Time Monitoring Using Bluetooth Technology project include the following:

• Minnesota Department of Transportation – Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology (OTST)

• Iteris, Inc. • Savari Networks, LLC • Hennepin County Public Works




Iteris, in the role of prime consultant, developed the Arterial Bluetooth system design and was responsible for system deployment, data collection and evaluation activities. Savari Networks supplied the eight (8) StreetWAVE devices and the web interface used for the collection of Bluetooth data along the corridor. Hennepin County Public Works provided in‐kind support with field staff and equipment for StreetWAVE device installation and troubleshooting during the deployment phase of the project. The Minnesota Department of Transportation Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology sponsored the project and provided project oversight.

1.2 CSAH 81 CORRIDOR LOCATIONS StreetWAVE Bluetooth devices were installed at six intersections along the CSAH 81 corridor. On the north and the south ends of the corridor, two StreetWAVE units were installed on the mast arm of intersection traffic signals, one unit facing each direction of traffic (northbound and southbound). This was done to ensure that the installed Bluetooth readers could provide sufficient coverage for monitoring and tracking devices at the corridor end points. During the course of the project it was determined that the range of the StreetWAVE units to detect vehicles (a radius of 330ft) would be adequate to cover the whole roadway in both directions. StreetWAVE readers were installed on existing traffic poles with approved mounting brackets at the following locations from north to south along CSAH 81:

• CSAH 81/Greenhaven Drive (2 devices‐NB and SB) • CSAH 81/71st Avenue (1 device‐SB) • CSAH 81/63rd Avenue (1 device‐NB) • CSAH 81/Bass Lake Road (1 device‐SB) • CSAH 81/42nd Avenue (1 device‐NB) • CSAH 81/36th Avenue (2 devices‐NB and SB)



FIGURE 1: STREETWAVE LOCATIONS ALONG CSAH 81





2.0 ARTERIAL BLUETOOTH SYSTEM DESIGN

2.1 SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS The Arterial Bluetooth system design was based upon the following requirements. Project Hardware

1.2.1 The device will detect MAC addresses of Bluetooth‐enabled devices. 1.2.2 The device will detect its GPS position. 1.2.3 The device will be able to support third‐party leased communication system. 1.2.4 The device will be weather‐resistant based on NEMA 67 standards. 1.2.5 The device will have at least 256 MB of internal memory. 1.2.6 The device will have at least 4 GB of compact flash disk space. 1.2.7 The device will be powered by24 v. DC. 1.2.8 The device will be secured to the traffic signal pole with an approved mounting

bracket.

Project Software/Interface System Access Requirements

1.4.1 The system will be accessed via the internet. 1.4.2 The system will be hosted and maintained by the Consultant. 1.4.3 The system will allow for multiple users to access the software at the same time. 1.4.4 The system will display a map of the CSAH 81 corridor. 1.4.5 The system will display an icon of each device on the map. 1.4.6 The system will display device status (on‐line, off‐line) 1.4.7 The system will display specific information for each StreetWAVE device, including:

a) IP address b) Receiver type c) Street name d) Cross‐street name e) Leased communications provider f) Contact information for maintenance

1.4.8 The system will allow for new devices to be added without software code modifications.

1.4.9 The system will allow for individual device information to be edited without re‐entry of all device information.


FIGURE 2: STREETWAVE INSTALLATION AND HARDWARE






System Recovery 1.4.10 Following restoration of device communications after a loss, the system will

automatically resume storing data without operator intervention. System Data Storage

1.4.11 The system will store data into a database such that individual lines or portions of the data can be retrieved from the source and transferred electronically to Microsoft Office applications (i.e., Excel, Word or Access).

System Data Reporting Requirements

1.4.12 The system will allow for data filtering and the searching records for specific entries (i.e., unique MAC addresses, etc.)

1.4.13 The system will calculate travel time between two user selected points along the CSAH 81 corridor.

1.4.14 The system will store raw data from each device in a relational database. 1.4.15 The system will allow for user‐definable time periods to aggregate travel time (i.e.,

1 minute, 3 minutes, 5 minutes, 15 minutes, 60 minutes, etc.) 1.4.16 The system will allow for a user‐definable smoothing feature to allow for removal

of high and low travel times within the distribution. 1.4.17 The system will provide a tabular summary data output.

a) The system will provide a tabular summary of Bluetooth MAC records at a specific location by user‐definable time period.

b) The system will provide a tabular display of travel times between user‐definable link combinations.

c) The system will provide a tabular display of travel times between user‐definable link combinations as one aggregate value across multiple links.

d) The system will provide a tabular display of the mean travel time, total number of Bluetooth device matches between readers, and median and relative percentages.

e) The system will provide a tabular display of user‐definable time intervals and link combinations with the number of Bluetooth reads, Bluetooth matches and link data.

f) The system will display a graphical scatter plot of individual travel times between a pair of locations (selectable) over a certain period of time (selectable).

g) The system will provide XML output of data.

Leased Communication System Requirements 1.5.1 Data transfer rates will be field‐tested and documented prior to deployment. 1.5.2 Trouble shooting of leased communications will be the responsibility of Consultant. 1.5.3 Communications issues will be documented by Consultant.




2.2 BLUETOOTH SYSTEM HARDWARE The hardware installed for the Arterial Bluetooth system deployed along CSAH 81 consisted of the following components:

• Eight (8) Savari StreetWAVE Bluetooth receivers • Eight (8) Omni‐directional receiver antennas • Eight (8) 120 v AC to 24 v DC power converters • Eight (8) NEMA3 cabinet enclosures to house power converter equipment • Eight (8) mounting brackets for Bluetooth receivers • Six (6) 3G wireless modems (third‐party service provider)

StreetWAVE receivers were installed with approved mounting brackets and placed on existing traffic signal pole mast arms at each of the designated six intersections on CSAH 81. In addition, a 24v DC power converter housed in an approved cabinet enclosure was mounted on the pole to convert existing power for use with the StreetWAVE receiver at each location. All components were secured to the pole with Band‐It strapping and satisfied field‐hardened specifications. All components were sealed to prevent moisture intrusion according to Hennepin County Public Works guidelines.

2.3 BLUETOOTH SYSTEM SOFTWARE AND USER INTERFACE The central software algorithm matched MAC signatures from Bluetooth‐enabled devices traveling along CSAH 81 which were time stamped at the various StreetWAVE locations to calculate travel time for each captured vehicle and each link. This information was aggregated according to user‐defined time periods, and the raw time stamp information was stored in a central server location. The information was graphically displayed when accessed and viewed by users through a password protected internet connection to the server.

2.4 COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM During the course of the deployment, 3G wireless services were provided by a third‐party leased provider (Sprint) at each of the installed StreetWAVE device locations. On the north and south intersections of the corridor, the two respective northbound and southbound StreetWAVE units communicated with each other using Wi‐Fi communications in order to reduce the leased wireless service costs by, requiring only one Sprint 3G connection from that intersection to the back office.

Data Transfer Rates

Prior to the deployment of the system, data transfer rates were field‐tested and documented to ensure that a reliable wireless communications system was available along the CSAH 81




corridor. At all device locations, 3G download speeds were tested; they ranged between 500kbps and 1.5Mbps. Upload speeds ranged from 200kbps to 550kbps. These readings indicated that the wireless services available at each location would be more than enough to satisfy the project data communication requirements.

Wi‐Fi Interference/Network Latency

On August 19, 2009 the potential for Wi‐Fi interference along the CSAH 81 corridor was assessed. The following is the number of access points (APs) detected on that date at each location:

TABLE 1. BLUETOOTH/WI‐FI INTERFERENCE TEST RESULTS

Receiver Location Measured Signal Strength

Open APs

CSAH 81/Greenhaven Dr. 6 – Strength 36% or Less 6 CSAH 81/71st Avenue 2 – Strength 34% or Less 1 CSAH 81/63rd Avenue 7 ‐ Strength 39% or Less 0 CSAH 81/Bass Lake Road 3 – Strength 36% or Less 0 CSAH 81/42nd Avenue 7 – Strength 30% or Less 4 CSAH 81/36th Avenue 2 – Strength 25% or Less 0

On the same date, network latency at all sites ranged between 57ms and 117ms. Based on these readings, a determination was made by the consultants that interference would not significantly affect project deployment and that the measured network configuration would not require modifications to the project plan in terms of additional equipment.

3.0 BLUETOOTH SYSTEM DATA COLLECTION AND EVALUATION PROCESS

The process used for collecting system data and evaluating the performance of the Arterial Bluetooth Travel Time Monitoring System along CSAH 81 consisted of the following tasks:

• Review of existing traffic information along CSAH 81 provided by Hennepin County.

• Collection of traffic data, including volume and travel times along the CSAH 81 corridor, prior to system deployment and during system deployment, in order to compare manually collected data against StreetWAVE data collected from Bluetooth devices traveling through the CSAH 81 corridor.

• Collection of StreetWAVE device data, including individual MAC addresses from known Bluetooth devices traveling along the CSAH 81 corridors, as well as time‐




stamped information on the first and the last time a particular device was detected within the range of one Bluetooth receiver.

• Analysis of compared data in a number of ways, including average speed, number of Bluetooth matches, standard deviation and percentage of speed differential between the two sets of data. Other anomalies related to corridor conditions (i.e., construction along the corridor, traffic incidents, etc.) were also noted as they occurred.

Anecdotal analysis of anomalies related to corridor conditions (i.e. construction along the corridor, traffic incidents, etc.) which were noted as they occurred. Further information about data collection activities and results is presented later in this section. Actual data collection information is summarized and contained within the appendix of this report.

3.1 DATA COLLECTION ACTIVITIES

3.1.1 TRAVEL TIME RUNS Travel time runs were performed for a twelve hour period over weekdays between 6:30 AM and 6:30 PM in May, September, and October 2010. Traditionally, travel times are completed using the “average floating car” technique as described in the 2000 ITE Transportation Engineering Studies Manual. During the May and September 2010 runs, the “average floating car” technique was used to determine the average travel time of a vehicle passing through the corridor. After the initial phase of the data collection was complete, the Iteris team determined that this technique was requiring more frequent lane changes (than typical the average driver along the corridor) to pass or be passed by other vehicles to maintain the average travel conditions. In order to address this issue, a “platoon” travel time run technique as described in the 2000 ITE Transportation Engineering Studies Manual was used during the October 2010 time runs to ensure that a representative sample of CSAH 81 traffic was collected and used for a comparison of data. The field measured travel time runs were performed using GPS software to calculate each travel time run time and average speeds along the CSAH 81 corridor. Average field measured travel times that resulted from the completed runs can be found in Tables 2 and 3. The tables summarize the AM, Off and PM peak periods. These peaks are defined as:

• AM Peak Period 6:30‐9:00 AM • Off‐Peak Period 9:01 AM‐3:00 PM • PM Peak Period 3:01‐6:30 PM


TABLE 2. FIELD MEASURED TRAVEL TIME STUDY SUMMARY – NORTHBOUND

Northbound AM Peak Period Travel Times Sept. 8th Travel Time Study Sept. 9th Travel Time Study Oct 13th Travel Time Study

From To

Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)

No. of Runs Performed

Standard Deviation

Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation

Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)

No. of Runs Performed Minimum Maximum

Standard Deviation

Percent Difference in Min/Max Speed

36th Ave. 42nd Ave. 96.0 38.1 4 1.72 121.5 31.9 4 7.82 112.5 32.1 4 99 122 3.12 16.3%42nd Ave. Bass Lake 194.0 35.1 4 5.66 195.8 34.3 4 5.13 204.3 32.7 4 189 218 1.92 7.0%Bass Lake 63rd Ave. 114.8 35.7 4 8.86 84.0 47.8 4 3.39 141.3 29.7 4 105 174 7.28 37.9%63rd Ave. 71st Ave. 161.8 24.8 4 3.49 151.3 26.5 4 3.34 108.8 38.4 4 77 135 9.90 35.5%71st Ave. Greenhaven 117.8 40.4 4 0.93 111.5 41.8 4 5.04 145.5 36.2 4 98 204 11.77 13.5%

Northbound Off Peak Period Travel Times Sept. 8th Travel Time Study Sept. 9th Travel Time Study Oct 13th Travel Time Study

From To

Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation

Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation

Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation



Northbound PM Peak Period Travel Times Sept. 8th Travel Time Study Sept. 9th Travel Time Study Oct 13th Travel Time Study

From To

Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation

Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation

Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation








TABLE 3. FIELD MEASURED TRAVEL TIME STUDY SUMMARY – SOUTHBOUND

Southbound AM Peak Period Travel Times Sept. 8th Travel Time Study Sept. 9th Travel Time Study Oct. 13th Travel Time Study

From To

Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)

No. of Runs

Performed Standard Deviation

Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation

Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation

Percent Difference in

Min/Max Speed Greenhaven 71st Ave. 161.2 31.0 5 4.73 156.8 30.2 4 2.82 188.4 27.5 5 110 254 9.50 11.5%71st Ave. 63rd Ave. 133.4 34.0 5 12.03 138.5 29.2 4 3.95 138.0 30.2 5 81 164 10.18 14.2%63rd Ave. Bass Lake 186.8 30.0 5 12.65 122.0 34.5 4 8.68 129.8 34.4 5 80 181 12.28 12.9%Bass Lake 42nd Ave 307.6 25.4 5 12.43 330.8 22.0 4 6.98 197.0 33.5 5 192 201 0.59 34.4%42nd Ave. 36th Ave. 89.0 31.6 5 14.25 104.8 35.3 4 6.69 95.4 39.0 5 78 135 7.74 19.0%

Southbound Off Peak Period Travel Times Sept. 8th Travel Time Study Sept. 9th Travel Time Study Oct. 13th Travel Time Study

From To

Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)

No. of Runs


Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation

Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation

Percent Difference in

Min/Max Speed Greenhaven 71st Ave. 144.3 35.3 9 7.16 158.0 31.6 9 7.12 199.2 25.2 9 146 287 5.41 28.6%71st Ave. 63rd Ave. 121.2 34.5 9 10.63 119.9 34.0 9 6.67 110.1 36.3 9 82 152 5.86 6.3%

63rd Ave. Bass Lake

Rd. 116.9 35.6 9 6.11 127.4 34.3 9 8.45 132.3 32.4 9 84 188 8.59 8.9%Bass Lake

Rd. 42nd Ave. 197.4 33.6 9 4.62 212.9 31.4 9 4.14 168.1 39.9 9 130 215 5.70 21.4%

42nd Ave. 36th Ave. 111.9 33.2 9 6.33 113.3 32.6 9 6.18 126.2 30.2 9 81 173 8.48 9.1%

Southbound PM Peak Period Travel Times Sept. 8th Travel Time Study Sept. 9th Travel Time Study Oct. 13th Travel Time Study

From To

Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)

No. of Runs


Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)

No. of Runs


Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)

No. of Runs

Performed Minimum Maximum Standard Deviation Percent Difference in Min/Max Speed

Greenhaven 71st Ave. 159.6 31.6 5 6.02 142.0 33.1 5 5.70 179.4 28.4 5 120 260 7.82 14.3%71st Ave. 63rd Ave. 131.2 31.3 5 6.45 113.0 35.3 5 8.11 122.6 32.2 5 105 138 3.84 11.3%

63rd Ave. Bass Lake

Rd. 107.0 39.9 5 9.17 126.0 31.9 5 4.69 109.8 39.3 5 81 173 10.53 20.1%Bass Lake

Rd. 42nd Ave. 258.6 25.9 5 4.11 212.0 31.0 5 3.41 178.4 37.5 5 151 200 4.80 30.9%

42nd Ave. 36th Ave. 102.6 35.7 5 5.92 135.0 26.6 5 2.25 126.8 29.5 5 85 159 7.63 25.6%


Page 12

Mn/DOT ITS Innovative Idea Project


A brief review of the travel time summaries indicates that this corridor experiences a relatively large difference in travel time and the resulting average speed calculations range from 7% to 60%. This can be attributed to the nature of this arterial, the daily fluctuations in mainline and side street demand or mid‐block driveways along a segment of the corridor, which can have a substantial impact on the travel time within the corridor.

3.1.2 DIRECTIONAL TUBE (VOLUME) COUNTS Directional tube counts were also placed in selected locations along CSAH 81 at the same time the travel times were being performed to determine traffic volumes at each node. This was done in order to eventually determine what percentage of the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) count the StreetWAVE device was able to identify at each corridor location. Table 4 presents the results of the traffic volume counts collected in May and September. Counts were not performed in October due to the consistency of ADTs measured in these collection periods and the lack of any external factor that would cause ADTs in October to be significantly different than during May/September.

TABLE 4. AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC FOR EACH NODE Intersection ADT – May ADT – September

81/Greenhaven Dr. NB 18,824 18,929

81/Greenhaven Dr. SB 16,683 14,865

81 / 71st Ave. SB 20,852 19,052

81 / 63rd Ave. NB 17,100 22,879

81 / Bass Lake Rd. SB 21,996 20,714

81 / 42nd Ave. NB 14,258 14,489

81 / 36th Ave. NB N/A 14,289

81 / 36th Ave. SB 14,482 14,412

This corridor has traffic characteristics that are consistent with roadway classification as a minor arterial. Peak period for commuters is typically from 7‐8 AM and from 4‐5 PM. The peak direction is typically southbound toward downtown Minneapolis during the AM and northbound from the downtown in the PM peak.

3.1.3 STREETWAVE DEVICE DATA

STREETWAVE MAC ADDRESSES The StreetWAVE device collects Media Access Control (MAC) addresses of Bluetooth‐enabled devices to calculate travel times for vehicles that are traveling along an arterial corridor. Any Bluetooth device located contained within the vehicle (i.e. laptop, or cell phone) or installed as


Page 13


part of the vehicle’s platform will provide a unique and anonymous 48 bit “address” or “signature” that can be read by the StreetWAVE unit as the Bluetooth‐enabled device moves into and through the reader’s operational zone. While each MAC address is stored within a Bluetooth‐enabled device, it is not possible to trace a MAC address back to a particular device or user, as MAC addresses are randomly assigned and distributed by the manufacturers. As an additional level of security, Savari Networks staff created a simple algorithm to mask actual MAC addresses collected as part of the project. To ensure the accuracy of the demonstrated system, a Bluetooth device with a known MAC address was used during each run of travel times performed along the CSAH 81 corridor during the project. Iteris staff independently verified and tracked the device’s MAC address by converting it using Savari Network’s algorithm in order to identify when and where the Bluetooth device was recognized by the StreetWAVE equipment during the travel time runs.

STREETWAVE TRAVEL TIME DATA Once the travel time runs were completed, data was pulled from the Savari web interface (http://minneapolis.savarinetworks.com). The data can be found at this web address by selecting “Travel Times” on the left sidebar on the home page, and selecting data for May 25‐26, September 8‐9 and October 12‐13, 2010. The data downloaded from the interface is provided in seconds. To better understand the information’s relevance to traffic conditions, travel times were converted to segment speed by taking the length of the segment divided by the time it took to traverse that segment length. This was done to provide a simpler means to review the data as the project team could more quickly relate to average speed versus seconds along a particular segment.

3.1.4 DATA FILTERING AND SMOOTHING When a Bluetooth device is within the range of a sensor, a record containing the MAC ID and the timestamp is created. The records are continuously accumulated until the device goes out of range of the sensor. When the device goes out of range, then the accumulated records are aggregated into one single record. This record contains the timestamp when the device was first seen, when it was last seen, and how often is had been seen. If the same device comes within range of the sensor after a time gap of 60 seconds, a new set of records is created and aggregated. The new aggregate record is distinct from the previous record. Travel times that are calculated between different locations can be filtered and smoothed using the web interface. The filtering options allow to only display travel times below a user definable ‘max time’ (between 1 and 360 minutes), and to eliminate the last 5% of travel times within a distribution of the frequency of occurrence of a particular travel time from the display.


http://minneapolis.savarinetworks.com/


Page 14


Data smoothing can be performed using the web display by modifying the average time interval, which determines the interval of time within which chart data is averaged. Averaging is possible for 1, 5, 10, 15 and 30 minute intervals. Savari provided an initial filter that is unbounded and eliminates sample sets based on the 95th percentile long‐tail distribution. After the data was filtered, the average travel time was calculated and shown in Tables 5 and 6.

TABLE 5. STREETWAVE TRAVEL TIME DATA – NORTHBOUND

From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed

(mph)No. of Bluetooth

Matches Standard Deviation36th Ave. 42nd Ave. 121.8 33.0 72 8.8542nd Ave. Bass Lake 194.3 35.6 22 6.50Bass Lake 63rd Ave. 89.8 49.1 69 11.1863rd Ave. 71st Ave. 117.6 36.6 100 10.5371st Ave. Greenhaven 132.1 40.6 117 12.09

From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed



From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed



October StreetWAVE Travel Times



Northbound Off Peak Period Travel Times

Northbound AM Peak Period Travel Times

Northbound PM Peak Period Travel Times



Page 15


TABLE 6. STREETWAVE TRAVEL TIME DATA – SOUTHBOUND

From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed



From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed



From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed




October StreetWAVE Travel TimesSouthbound PM Peak Period Travel Times

Southbound Off Peak Period Travel Times

Southbound AM Peak Period Travel TimesOctober StreetWAVE Travel Times



Page 16



STREETWAVE DATA SAMPLING It is important that the data collected is of a sufficient sample size to represent the conditions to a desired degree of accuracy. Using standard statistical analysis techniques, the sample size can be calculated from the following parameters: confidence level desired, margin of error, and population size. Assuming a 95% confidence level with a 5 % margin of error, and using the volume (~18,000 vehicles) identified from tube counts between 6:30 AM and 6:30 PM on a single day, a sample size of 375 “hits” or “matches” would be necessary. A majority of the segments exceed this sample size, a few segments are slightly below but are well within a 90% confidence of 267 samples.

3.2 DATA COMPARISON METHODOLOGY To compare the travel time information from the Bluetooth data to the travel time information collected through field measurement, a simple methodology was developed. Raw data was pulled from the Bluetooth server database for the same 24‐hour period that the field measured travel times were collected. October 13, 2010 was selected as the best date to evaluate the database entries to field measurements of travel time. The staff that completed the field travel time runs drove the route with their laptop Bluetooth enabled. Upon initial review, the data needed to be filtered to eliminate outliers. Outliers consist of database travel times that are outside the range of normal activity. This could be an emergency vehicle speeding to a destination with lights and sirens active (unusually short travel time) or a vehicle that is initially captured at a Bluetooth reader and then stops along the corridor to shop or have lunch and then drives the remainder of the corridor (unusually long travel time). These outliers, the unusually long and short travel times from the database were eliminated with a simple filter based on the posted speed limit. The filtering methodology bound the data on both ends of the distributed data. This filtering methodology is stated as vehicles (and their associated travel time) would not travel faster than 120% of the posted speed limit. This establishes the upper bound. The lower bound is established that vehicles would not travel slower than 20% of the posted speed limit. For example, if the posted speed limit along a segment of the corridor was 55 mph, the usable travel times from the Bluetooth database would be filtered based on the upper and lower limits determined by the segment length and the speed range between 11 mph and 66 mph (.20 x 55 and 1.20 x 55). Figure 2 on the next page shows the speed limit changes along CSAH 81.


Page 17


FIGURE 3: SPEED LIMIT CHANGES ALONG CSAH 81

3.2.1 DATA COMPARISON MAC Address Verification The Bluetooth database server can be searched for a specific MAC Address. This allowed for staff to search the database and verify the specific MAC address of the laptop that was being used to record the field measured travel times. Staff completed 21 northbound travel times between 6:30 AM and 6:30 PM. Bluetooth captured 20 of those runs. The database was output to a spreadsheet and individual links summarized (column 3) to verify the total travel time on the corridor as reported by the web site (column 4). The time stamps were manually subtracted one from another to verify the previous Bluetooth readings (column 5). Columns 3, 4 and 5 should all be the same travel time as the data is from the database of stored information. Discrepancies arise when occasionally the three times out of 20 an individual segment did not record the MAC address. Finally, Bluetooth travel time calculations (column 4) were compared to the summary from the field measured travel times (column 6) and the difference calculated. The calculated differences should be relatively small. Larger differences are associated with the position of the Bluetooth reader relative to the center of the intersection which was used to mark each segment for the field measurements. In theory, the field vehicle could be stopped



Page 18



and measured by the Bluetooth and not have reached the center of the intersection. This could potentially account for the longer travel times for the field measurements.

TABLE 7. TRAVEL TIME VERIFICATION AND COMPARISON October 13th StreetWAVE Travel Time Verification and Comparison

(T1) Last Seen at 36th Ave.

(T2) Last Seen at Greenhaven

Ave.

Summation of

StreetWAVE Segment

Travel Times (Last‐Last)

StreetWAVE Total Time (from SW36thN ‐

SWGreenhavenN query)

Manually Calculated Travel

Time (i.e. T2—T1)

Collected Travel Times

Difference (sec.)

6:53:07 AM 7:05:58 AM 771 771 771 726 45 7:27:53 AM 7:38:02 AM 609 609 609 630 21 8:01:23 AM 8:12:57 AM 694 694 694 743 49 8:47:07 AM 8:58:31 AM 495* 684 684 750 66 9:17:01 AM 9:28:21 AM 680 680 680 706 26 9:47:11 AM 9:58:09 AM 658 658 658 602 56 10:18:08

AM 10:28:04 AM 596 596 596 700 104 10:46:19

AM 10:58:08 AM 709 709 709 677 32 11:25:12

AM 11:37:25 AM 733 733 733 764 31 11:54:27

AM 12:05:53 PM 686 686 686 698 12 1:04:44 PM 1:16:19 PM 695 695 695 791 96 1:36:45 PM 1:51:01 PM 856 856 856 892 36 2:10:48 PM 2:23:37 PM 769 769 769 778 9 2:43:35 PM 2:54:07 PM 632 632 632 666 34 3:15:54 PM 3:27:38 PM 704 704 704 777 73 3:48:30 PM 3:59:42 PM 672 672 672 728 56 4:20:22 PM 4:33:44 PM 483* 802 802 787 15 4:51:17 PM 5:06:10 PM 593* 893 893 945 52 5:24:09 PM 5:38:08 PM 839 839 839 851 12 5:58:53 PM 6:11:34 PM 761 761 761 785 24

*Denotes one or more segments did not detect the MAC address resulting in a missing travel time. Since one of the travel times is missing, the summation does not equal the respective values in Columns D and E.


Page 19



3.2.2 TREND ANALYSIS One of the criteria for evaluation was whether Bluetooth could be used to identify trends in traffic flow along the corridor both in near‐real time and historically. Table 7 summarizes average travel time for AM, OFF, and PM peak periods for the typical travel days (Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday) for the week in advance, the first week of construction and the second week of construction along the segment of 63rd Avenue and Bass Lake Road. Temporary traffic control started August 10, 2010; as shown the remainder of the week, all periods experienced increased travel times. Travel times started to balance in the second week as travelers adjusted to the traffic control or potentially moved to alternate routes, but it still remained higher than pre‐construction travel times. Additionally, staff plotted the range of field measured travel times on the Bluetooth summary of travel times for October 13, 2010 for each segment and the total corridor. Generally, the range of field‐measured travel times bounded the upper and lower limit of the Bluetooth travel time summary from the website. Northbound Bass Lake Road to 63rd Avenue in Figure 4 is representative of this trend. This should provide confidence to agencies that the representative average travel time can be calculated through the development of a statistically significant algorithm or filter.


Page 20


FIGURE 4: BLUETOOTH TRAVEL TIME SUMMARY FOR CONSTRUCTION RELATED ACTIVITY



FIGURE 5: OCTOBER 13, 2010 SEGMENT LEVEL COMPARISON




Page 22



Database to Field Measurements Once the data from the travel time runs and the StreetWAVE interface were coordinated for comparison, the data was compiled and shown in Tables 8 and 9. The two sets of data were compared against each other and the percentage of difference is shown between each Travel Time/StreetWAVE data set.


TABLE 8. OCTOBER 13, 2010 STREETWAVE TRAVEL TIME DATA TO TRAVEL TIME STUDY COMPARISON – NORTHBOUND

From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed


MatchesStandard Deviation

Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation

36th Ave. 42nd Ave. 125.7 29.5 51 25.6 112.5 32.1 4 99 122 3.1242nd Ave. Bass Lake 192.6 35.5 27 33.5 204.3 32.7 4 189 218 1.92Bass Lake 63rd Ave. 117.0 36.6 92 32.5 141.3 29.7 4 105 174 7.2863rd Ave. 71st Ave. 128.4 33.5 49 31.5 108.8 38.4 4 77 135 9.9071st Ave. Greenhaven 136.2 37.7 74 34.9 145.5 36.2 4 98 204 11.77

From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed



Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation


From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed



Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation


Northbound AM Peak Period Comparison

Northbound Off Peak Period Comparison

Northbound PM Peak Period ComparisonOct 13th Travel Time Study

Oct 13th Travel Time Study


October 13th StreetWAVE Travel Times






TABLE 9. OCTOBER 13, 2010 STREETWAVE TRAVEL TIME DATA TO TRAVEL TIME STUDY COMPARISON – NORTHBOUND

From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed



Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation

36th Ave. Greenhaven 698.4 33.3 7 68.85 712.0 32.6 4 630 750 55.75Avg. Variance 3.2

5.0

From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed



Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation


4.0

From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed



Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation


3.0

Northbound AM Peak Period Comparison

Northbound Off Peak Period Comparison

Northbound PM Peak Period Comparison

No. of Runs Needed

No. of Runs Needed





No. of Runs Needed






TABLE 10. OCTOBER 13, 2010 STREETWAVE TRAVEL TIME DATA TO TRAVEL TIME STUDY COMPARISON – SOUTHBOUND

From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed



Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation

Greenhaven 71st Ave. 147.9 35.0 107 38.6 188.4 27.5 5 110 254 9.5071st Ave. 63rd Ave. 123.5 34.8 123 32.9 138.0 30.2 5 81 164 10.1863rd Ave. Bass Lake Rd. 80.7 50.9 193 13.3 129.8 34.4 5 80 181 12.28

Bass Lake Rd. 42nd Ave. 199.5 34.3 43 34.4 197.0 33.5 5 192 201 0.5942nd Ave. 36th Ave. 109.6 34.2 68 25.3 95.4 39.0 5 78 135 7.74

From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed



Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation




From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed



Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation



Oct. 13th Travel Time Study

Southbound AM Peak Period Comparison

Southbound Off Peak Period Comparison

Southbound PM Peak Period Comparison


October 13th StreetWAVE Travel Times Oct. 13th Travel Time Study

Oct. 13th Travel Time Study




TABLE 11. OCTOBER 13, 2010 STREETWAVE TRAVEL TIME DATA TO TRAVEL TIME STUDY COMPARISON – SOUTHBOUND

From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed



Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation


3.0

From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed



Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation


2.0

From ToTravel Time

(sec)Average Speed



Travel Time (sec)

Average Speed (mph)


Standard Deviation


4.0

Oct 13th Travel Time StudySouthbound AM Peak Period Comparison

No. of Runs Needed

No. of Runs Needed

No. of Runs Needed




Southbound Off Peak Period Comparison

Southbound PM Peak Period Comparison






Page 27



Random Sample of Bluetooth Data The final step in the evaluation was to determine if a random sample of the Bluetooth data would compare to the traditional technique of travel time evaluation as described in the 2000 ITE Manual of Transportation Engineering Studies. The first step was to select a small set of Bluetooth data, five (5) matches, which would be consistent with the number of travel time runs that a technician could accomplish during a peak period evaluation. This data was then summarized and the average running speed calculated and compared to Table 4‐1 of the 2000 ITE Manual of Transportation Engineering Studies with an error of one or two miles per hour. Using this information yields the number of runs needed for a statistically significant sample with an error of 1‐2 mph. This effort was completed for Bluetooth data collected on October 13, 2010. In all but a few instances, the number of additional runs needed to create a statistical significant sample within a one or two mile per hour error was well below the number of Bluetooth samples collected for the time period. The results of these findings can be found in Appendix D. This would indicate that if the CSAH 81 experience is typical, there is consistently a large enough sample size to calculate a statistically significant average of travel using Bluetooth readers.

4.0 SUMMARY OF EVALUATION RESULTS One of the goals of this project was to determine if Bluetooth technology could be used to accurately estimate travel times along an arterial corridor. That question can be answered “Yes”. That does not mean that an agency can just plug and play with this type of system. The goal of this project was not to develop the perfect algorithm that most accurately adjusts Bluetooth sampled travel times to field measured travel times. The results of this study show that Bluetooth data can be used in future applications to publish arterial travel times to an ATIS web site. When evaluating the Bluetooth readers as a means to sample and report arterial travel time, one must consider the operational characteristics of the corridor that is to be monitored. In general, the standard deviation is consistently higher for the Bluetooth data sets when compared to the travel time data. This is to be expected, because the field measured travel time data represents a through movement along the corridor during each run, whereas the Bluetooth data also includes drivers entering and exiting onto the CSAH 81 corridor. Additionally, Bluetooth data represents a greater number of drivers, each having a unique set of driver characteristics, which is different from a trained technician trying to drive the corridor with the “platoon” or representing the average driver. Bluetooth travel time samples make up for this variance with a greater number of samples. Because the range of operating speeds varies greatly along arterial corridors, additional study will be needed to better relate Bluetooth data to the current traditional travel time


Page 28



methodologies. Future applications should consider the best way to report or summarize arterial travel time information for the general public.

5.0 SYSTEM HARDWARE/SOFTWARE OPERATIONAL AND MAINTENANCE COSTS

The hardware and software supply and installation costs of the arterial Bluetooth system deployed along CSAH 81 comprised of the following:

TABLE 12. ARTERIAL BLUETOOTH PROJECT HARDWARE/SOFTWARE COSTS

Hardware Type Unit Cost Number of Units Total Cost 3G+5Ghz+BT enabled AP $6,000 2 $12,000 5Ghz+BT enabled AP $5,000 2 $10,000 3G+BT enabled AP $5,000 4 $20,000 Server (purchased) $3,000 1 $3,000 Miscellaneous installation hardware (strapping, etc.)

N/A N/A $3,000

Total: $48,0001

On either end of the CSAH 81 corridor (Greenhaven Drive on the north and 36th Avenue on the south), one 3G+5Ghz+BT enabled AP StreetWAVE device was placed along with a corresponding 5Ghz+BT enabled AP device for optimal performance. At the four intersections in between the corridor end points (71st Avenue, 63rd Avenue, Bass Lake Road and 42nd Avenue), one 3G+BT enabled AP StreetWAVE device was placed in either a northbound or southbound position (alternated between locations). Hardware/Software Operational and Maintenance Issues During the demonstration project from May through December 2010, minimal StreetWAVE operational issues were observed. Savari staff monitored system performance and provided remote system upgrades as necessary during the deployment period, while Iteris staff maintained a log of operational issues to note equipment problems and system failures and provided field troubleshooting and support. A copy of the issues log can be found in the Appendix B this document. During the installation and initial deployment of the StreetWAVE equipment along CSAH 81, four power cords attached to the bottom of the StreetWAVE devices had to be replaced in the field. On two occasions in July 2010, the power cords were found to be loosely connected to

1 This cost does not include Iteris, Savari Networks and Hennepin County in-kind project contributions. The total in-kind project contribution is estimated at $57,000.


Page 29


the devices and “not locked” into place. This situation was resolved by twisting the ring at the top of the cord where it enters the bottom of the device into a locked position and registering an audible “click”. Hennepin County Public Works staff was able to quickly diagnose and correct this issue and through the remaining months of the demonstration there were no further problems noted. In September 2010 the StreetWAVE device installed at the intersection of CSAH 81 and Bass Lake Road had to be removed due to road construction. At that particular location the StreetWAVE device was wired directly to the traffic cabinet on the southwest side of the intersection because of construction access issues near the site. This device was reinstalled on a temporary traffic signal pole several days later. During the reinstallation of the device a power failure was noted which caused the device to remain out of operation until troubleshooting could determine the issue. Power was restored to the unit after verification of all power connections; after rebooting the device it became operational. 3G communications to the site was also interrupted during this time, which again required a device reboot in order to restore communications at the Bass Lake Road location. System Operational Costs The deployed StreetWAVE system drew power at each signalized location from the adjacent traffic cabinet. Each device was installed on the signal mast arm and power was accessed by connecting to a power fuse and wiring at the base of each pole. A 24v DC power converter was used to convert power for each StreetWAVE device. At each intersection the converter was installed on the traffic signal pole. The cost of providing the power to each device is unknown at this time and was supplied by Hennepin County as part of the project partnership in‐kind donation.


3G wireless service was provided by Sprint to six of the eight installed StreetWAVE devices in the field. Two of the devices (one on the north end of the corridor at Greenhaven Drive and one at the south end of the corridor on 36th Avenue) did not require 3G service because of the configuration of StreetWAVE devices at each corridor end point, which instead used Wi‐Fi to transmit data wirelessly between the northbound and southbound units in close proximity to one another. This was done to save on additional monthly 3G service costs for the system’s operations.


Page 30



3G Operational Costs Six (6) of the eight (8) StreetWAVE devices installed along CSAH 81 for the project required 3G wireless service provision. Sprint was chosen as the third‐party provider for this service based on the signal strength measured along the corridor. The average monthly operational cost for 3G service amount (without a government discount) was $340 during the project deployment period. This number did not include additional costs for system upgrades performed via 3G during the deployment period (higher data transmission rates will increase 3G monthly costs). 3G Operational Issues For the most part, there were few problems associated with the 3G wireless communications service at each of the eight Arterial Bluetooth locations along CSAH 81. When wireless service was interrupted, for whatever reason, the typical troubleshooting effort included a site visit to reboot the StreetWAVE unit (turning off and turning back on). During the course of the Project, this procedure had to be repeated more than once to successfully restore the system. During these events it appeared that the StreetWAVE device was operational but wireless service to the site was sporadic or not available for a short period of time; this would be indicative of a service provider transmission issue. This information was noted in the daily system log maintained by Iteris staff during the demonstration and can be found in Appendix B of this document.

6.0 PROJECT SUMMARY/NEXT STEPS The project has provided Mn/DOT and Hennepin County with a large volume of data, which, once synthesized and analyzed, could be of value for a number of traffic operations and transportation system planning purposes. During this particular demonstration, Hennepin County Public Works Staff expressed interest in how collected and analyzed data from the Arterial Travel Time Monitoring System Using Bluetooth Technology project could be used. Of utmost importance to both Mn/DOT and Hennepin County is identification of what the actual cost/benefit of using this system would be, and how best to use the system effectively. Based on the data that was collected during this project, Hennepin County Public Works staff identified a number of ways in which the data could be used, as follows:

• Public travel time information purposes • Assist in the prioritization of signal timing projects • Post‐construction review of corridor travel speeds • Transportation system planning • Integration with regional/county traveler information systems • As a transportation system measure of traffic flow performance


Page 31



Public Information Purposes One of Hennepin County’s goals is to ensure that the traveling public has the information it needs to safely and efficiently navigate the County’s transportation system. The Arterial Bluetooth system can be used as another “tool” in the County’s toolbox. For example, the County could provide pre‐trip travel times on specific routes, route delays or other traveler information as determined appropriate by the County. The benefit of this particular system is to provide real‐time and historic travel time data to meet Hennepin County’s needs. Prioritization of Signal Timing Projects Of particular interest to Hennepin County is assistance in determining how often and when to retime arterial corridor traffic signals. Presently the County reviews approximately one‐third of its signalized corridors each year and prioritizes signal retiming activities based on needs and available budget. Hennepin County Public Works staff must review each corridor to determine which corridor justifies retiming. In discussions with Mn/DOT and County staff on this particular issue, one enhancement that could be made to the StreetWAVE system in this regard would be in the “automation” of the system in terms of notifying the agency when certain thresholds have been met along a corridor based on collected travel time/speed information. For example, the County could make a determination along an arterial corridor that any travel speeds less than 25 miles per hour during AM or PM peak hours would require an automatic email or message notification to a TMC operator or system manager. The Bluetooth system has the ability to track how often and when the travel speeds along the corridor reached the pre‐set threshold and to generate user messages indicating each event. As necessary, County staff could review notifications and use empirical data to support the necessity for signal retiming, thus saving staff time while also providing a logical prioritization for County planning purposes. Corridor Level Traffic Management In the future, Mn/DOT and Hennepin County could use real‐time data for corridor‐level traffic management, with a goal of reducing travel delay by making the most efficient use of available resources. Bluetooth readers can be utilized for travel time sampling studies. Travel demand could be balanced across adjacent or parallel facilities, using strategies such as changing the direction of a reversible lane in response to an incident; changing the ramp metering timings; or using message boards to encourage motorists to divert to an alternate route. While this would require coordination between Mn/DOT, Hennepin County and/or other stakeholders, the value that real‐time data would provide to regional travelers and in the reduction of system delay makes the StreetWAVE system worthy of consideration. Another area where the StreetWAVE system may be of benefit is in the review of travel speeds along a corridor post‐construction. In this demonstration, data has been collected along the corridor at the CSAH 81/Bass Lake Road intersection from May 2010 through January 2011. This set of information can provide Hennepin County Public Works staff with a greater understanding of traffic flow conditions pre‐ and post‐construction near Bass Lake Road.


Page 32



Transportation System Planning The data gathered by the StreetWAVE system can be configured for use by transportation system planners by providing historical information about travel speeds along the corridor. As part of this project, tube counts were compiled to confirm ADT and verify speeds while Bluetooth equipment was in use. Using data gathered by the StreetWAVE readers could either reduce the need for other data collection activities required by County staff, or augment those efforts and streamline data collection processes, currently in place. For planning purposes, historical data can be easily accessible via the web interface. Integration with Regional/County Traveler Information Systems Data collected by the StreetWAVE system can be used to supplement 511 traveler information systems. In order to do so, data collected by the system would have to be “automated” and streamed into the Regional Traffic Management Center (RTMC) in Roseville and/or Hennepin County’s Public Works Facility in Medina. Data requirements (i.e. XML acceptability) would have to be reviewed with appropriate agency staff to ensure that data transmission methods, format and rates of flow are compatible with both agencies needs. Performance Measurement The NCHRP 20‐7 Guide to Benchmarking Operations Performance Measure identified travel time as a foremost indicator of the quality of traffic flow. The Federal Highway Administration is looking to incorporate economic analysis and performance measures to maximize financial resources. The use of timely, consistent and accurate travel time information along arterial corridors could provide a performance measure for agencies to evaluate a large number of enhancements and determine the return on the investment. Potential performance measures could include:

• The affects of a widening project along an arterial could be monitored. • The placement and use of changeable message boards to move traffic from a congested

arterial could be evaluated with before and after travel time information. Transportation agencies are asked to provide increased information regarding the quality of service that is provided along their roadways. Annual report cards are providing performance measures that summarize:

• Roadway Services Index • Roadway Safety Index • Emissions Index • Transit Services Index

These annual reports and indices could use arterial travel time to document specific information regarding a corridor’s signal performance or to document general trends regarding regional growth.


Page 33



The monitoring of arterial travel time, its improvement or degradation, can provide an input to the measurement of air quality and other metrics that are now used to determine regional priorities for various projects seeking to use Congestion Management Air Quality (CMAQ) funds. Issues for Further Consideration – Next Steps In regards to future applications and use of the Arterial Bluetooth System, the following issues require further consideration:

• What are other possible uses for the eight (8) StreetWAVE devices/units once the

project is completed? • Where does it make sense to deploy them for optimal benefit? • In this particular demonstration, the idea of enhancing the current Bluetooth system by

“automating” it to generate user notifications would be beneficial to Hennepin County Public Works staff. How could this be achieved?

• What are the roles of Mn/DOT and Hennepin County Public Works with regard to integrating collected Bluetooth data into the regional 511 system or for use with shared ITS systems and/or devices (e.g., DMS installed along a County road)?

• How should data server storage be done? Through a third‐party provider in a leased arrangement (i.e., Savari Networks) or directly with a transportation agency/user and with purchase of a server/system?




APPENDIX A 3G WIRELESS TEST RESULTS

22000099//22001100 IITTSS IInnnnoovvaattiivvee IIddeeaa PPrrooggrraamm

AArrtteerriiaall TTrraavveell TTiimmee MMoonniittoorriinngg SSyysstteemm UUssiinngg BBlluueettooootthh TTeecchhnnoollooggyy

AAttttaacchhmmeenntt 11

3G Speeds at Project Locations

1 - 81/Greenhaven Dr.:

2 - 81/ 71st Avenue:

3 - 81/63rd Avenue:

4 - 81/Wilshire Blvd.: (Note: location moved to Bass Lake)

4 – 81/Bass Lake Road:

5 - 81/42nd Avenue:

6 - 81/36th Avenue:

-

22000099//22001100 IITTSS IInnnnoovvaattiivvee IIddeeaa PPrrooggrraamm

AArrtteerriiaall TTrraavveell TTiimmee MMoonniittoorriinngg SSyysstteemm UUssiinngg BBlluueettooootthh TTeecchhnnoollooggyy

AAttttaacchhmmeenntt 22

WiFi Networks detected at Project Locations

1 - 81/Greenhaven Dr.: 6 (Signal strength 36% or less, 6 open AP’s)

2 - 81/ 71st Avenue: 2 (Signal strength 34% or less, 1 open AP)

3 - 81/63rd Avenue: 7 (Signal strength 39% or less)

4 - 81/Wilshire Blvd.: 3 (Signal strength 36% or less)

5 - 81/42nd Avenue: 7 Signal strength 30% or less, 4 open AP’s)

6 - 81/36th Avenue: 2 (Signal strength 25% or less)




APPENDIX B MAINTENANCE LOG SHEETS

Innovative Ideas Bluetooth Reader Test Log

1

Date Time Location(s) Error Message(s) Time Offline Initials

5/17/10 6:00 PM 42nd Ave. no communication with box N/A DSN

5/18/10 8:30 AM Bass Lake Road, 42nd Ave. no gps fix, no communication with box N/A, 245261 seconds DSN5/18/10 1:00 PM 42nd Ave. no communication with box 261513 seconds DSN5/18/10 5:00 PM 42nd Ave. no communication with box 284256 seconds DSN

5/19/10 8:30 AM 42nd Ave. no communication with box 328190 seconds DSN5/19/10 1:00 PM 42nd Ave. no communication with box 346385 seconds DSN5/19/10 5:00 PM 42nd Ave. no communication with box 364851 seconds DSN

5/20/10 8:30 AM 42nd Ave. no communication with box 418456 seconds DSN5/20/10 1:00 PM 42nd Ave. no communication with box 433832 seconds DSN5/20/10 5:00 PM 42nd Ave. no communication with box 444387 seconds DSN

5/21/10 8:30 AM 42nd Ave. no communication with box 500965 seconds DSN5/21/10 3:12 PM None 42nd fixed, bad power cable N/A DSN5/21/10 5:00 PM None None None DSN

5/24/10 8:30 AM None None None DSN5/24/10 1:00 PM5/24/10 5:00 PM

5/25/10 8:30 AM 36th Ave. N. no system data rcvd 22022 seconds DSN5/25/10 1:00 PM5/25/10 5:00 PM

5/26/10 8:30 AM5/26/10 1:00 PM5/26/10 5:00 PM

5/27/10 8:30 AM5/27/10 1:00 PM5/27/10 5:00 PM

5/28/10 8:30 AM5/28/10 1:00 PM5/28/10 5:00 PM


2

6/1/10 8:30 AM 42nd Ave. no system data rcvd 154891 seconds DSN6/1/10 11:30 PM 36th Ave. N. 42nd Ave. working/No communication with b951 seconds DSN6/1/10 5:00 PM

6/2/10 8:30 AM 36th Ave. N. no system data rcvd 64497 seconds DSN6/2/10 1:00 PM 36th Ave. N. fixed, Ravi rebooted node DSN6/2/10 5:00 PM

6/3/10 8:30 AM6/3/10 1:00 PM6/3/10 5:00 PM

6/4/10 8:30 AM6/4/10 1:00 PM None None None DSN6/4/10 5:00 PM

6/7/10 8:30 AM None None None DSN6/7/10 1:00 PM None None None DSN6/7/10 5:00 PM

6/8/10 8:30 AM 36th Ave. N. no communication with box 17349 seconds DSN6/8/10 1:00 PM6/8/10 5:00 PM

6/9/10 8:30 AM6/9/10 1:00 PM None 36th Ave working, rebooted? Not sure why it None DSN6/9/10 5:00 PM 42nd Ave. no system data rcvd, Ravi rebooted node 9886 seconds DSN

6/10/10 8:30 AM 42nd Ave. no system data rcvd 4668 seconds DSN6/10/10 1:00 PM 36th Ave. N. 42nd Ave. fixed/36th Ave. no data rcvd 3245 seconds DSN6/10/10 5:00 PM 36th Ave. N no system data rcvd 10565 seconds DSN

6/11/10 8:30 AM 36th Ave. N no communication with box 77249 seconds DSN6/11/10 1:00 PM6/11/10 5:00 PM

6/14/10 8:30 AM6/14/10 1:00 PM 36th Ave. N no communication with box 204298 seconds DSN6/14/10 5:00 PM


3

6/15/10 8:30 AM 36th Ave. N no communication with box 273172 seconds DSN6/15/10 1:00 PM 36th Ave. N/42nd Ave no communication with box/no data rcvd 293243 s/21635 s DSN6/15/10 5:00 PM

6/16/10 8:30 AM 42nd Ave. no system data rcvd 84211 seconds DSN6/16/10 1:00 PM None 42nd Ave. node rebooted None DSN6/16/10 5:00 PM None None None DSN

6/17/10 8:30 AM 36th Ave. N no communication with box 84605 seconds DSN6/17/10 1:00 PM6/17/10 5:00 PM 36th Ave. N/42nd Ave no communication with box/no data rcvd 83811 s/13104 s DSN

6/18/10 8:30 AM 36th Ave. N no communication with box 147072 seconds DSN6/18/10 1:00 PM6/18/10 5:00 PM 36th Ave. N no communication with box 4501 seconds DSN


6/22/10 8:30 AM 36th Ave. N/42nd Ave no communication with box/no data rcvd 327287 s/44243 s DSN6/22/10 1:00 PM 36th Ave. N/42nd Ave no communication with box/no data rcvd 343473 s/60429 s DSN6/22/10 5:00 PM

6/23/10 8:30 AM 36th Ave. N no communication with box 413904 seconds DSN6/23/10 1:00 PM 36th Ave. N no communication with box 429722 seconds DSN6/23/10 5:00 PM

6/24/10 8:30 AM6/24/10 1:00 PM 36th Ave. N no communication with box 519738 seconds DSN6/24/10 5:00 PM


6/26/10 8:30 AM6/26/10 1:00 PM6/26/10 5:00 PM


4

6/27/10 8:30 AM6/27/10 1:00 PM6/27/10 5:00 PM

6/28/10 8:30 AM6/28/10 1:00 PM6/28/10 5:00 PM

6/29/10 8:30 AM6/29/10 1:00 PM6/29/10 5:00 PM

6/30/10 8:30 AM Greenhaven S. No bluetooth device seen 1801 seconds DSN6/30/10 1:00 PM6/30/10 5:00 PM

7/1/10 8:30 AM7/1/10 1:00 PM7/1/10 5:00 PM

7/2/10 8:30 AM Greenhaven S. , 36th Ave. S, 36 No bluetooth device seen ~3000 seconds for all DSN7/2/10 1:00 PM Greenhaven S. , 36th Ave. S, 36 No bluetooth device seen ~3000 seconds for all DSN7/2/10 5:00 PM

7/6/10 8:30 AM None None None DSN7/6/10 1:00 PM None None None DSN7/6/10 5:00 PM None None None DSN





5

7/12/10 8:30 AM7/12/10 1:00 PM7/12/10 5:00 PM











6






8/2/10 8:30 AM 42nd Ave. no communication with box 107504 seconds DSN8/2/10 1:00 PM 42nd Ave. no communication with box 137612 seconds DSN8/2/10 5:00 PM None 42nd fixed, manual reboot None DSN


8/4/10 8:30 AM None None None DSN8/4/10 1:00 PM None None None DSN8/4/10 5:00 PM

8/5/10 8:30 AM8/5/10 1:00 PM8/5/10 5:00 PM

8/6/10 8:30 AM8/6/10 1:00 PM8/6/10 5:00 PM


7





8/13/10 8:30 AM None None None DSN8/13/10 1:00 PM 42nd Ave. No system data rcvd 15121 seconds DSN8/13/10 5:00 PM None None None DSN

8/16/10 8:30 AM 42nd Ave. No system data rcvd 63419 seconds DSN8/16/10 1:00 PM8/16/10 5:00 PM






8




8/26/10 8:30 AM None None None DSN8/26/10 1:00 PM None None None DSN8/26/10 5:00 PM Bass Lake Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole None DSN

8/27/10 8:30 AM Bass Lake Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole None DSN8/27/10 1:00 PM Bass Lake Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole None DSN8/27/10 5:00 PM Bass Lake Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole None DSN


8/31/10 8:30 AM Bass Lake, Greenhaven N Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven, no data rcvd DSN8/31/10 1:00 PM Bass Lake, Greenhaven N Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven, no data rcvd DSN8/31/10 5:00 PM Bass Lake, Greenhaven N Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven, no data rcvd DSN



9/3/10 8:30 AM Bass Lake, Greenhaven N Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven, no data rcvd DSN9/3/10 1:00 PM Bass Lake, Greenhaven N Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven, no data rcvd DSN9/3/10 5:00 PM Bass Lake Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole None DSN


9





9/10/10 8:30 AM Bass Lake, Greenhaven N & S Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven system down DSN9/10/10 1:00 PM Bass Lake, Greenhaven N & S Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven system down DSN9/10/10 5:00 PM Bass Lake, Greenhaven N & S Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven system down DSN

9/13/10 8:30 AM Bass Lake, Greenhaven N & S Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven system down DSN9/13/10 1:00 PM Bass Lake, Greenhaven N & S Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven system down DSN9/13/10 5:00 PM Bass Lake, Greenhaven N & S Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven system down DSN

9/14/10 8:30 AM Bass Lake, Greenhaven N, 42n Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven system down, 4 DSN9/14/10 1:00 PM Bass Lake, Greenhaven Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven system down, 4 DSN9/14/10 5:00 PM Bass Lake, Greenhaven Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven system down, 4 DSN

9/15/10 8:30 AM Bass Lake, Greenhaven Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven system down, 4 DSN9/15/10 1:00 PM Bass Lake, Greenhaven Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven system down, 4 DSN9/15/10 5:00 PM Bass Lake, Greenhaven Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven system down, 4 DSN

9/16/10 8:30 AM Bass Lake, Greenhaven Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole Ghaven system down, 4 DSN9/16/10 1:00 PM Bass Lake Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole DSN9/16/10 5:00 PM Bass Lake Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole DSN

9/17/10 8:30 AM Bass Lake Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole DSN9/17/10 1:00 PM Bass Lake Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole DSN9/17/10 5:00 PM Bass Lake Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole DSN


10












11







10/12/10 8:30 AM Bass Lake Uninstalled, installing on temp. pole DSN10/12/10 1:00 PM None None DSN10/12/10 5:00 PM None None DSN

10/13/10 8:30 AM None None DSN10/13/10 1:00 PM None None DSN10/13/10 5:00 PM None None DSN




12












13

11/1/10 8:30 AM 36th Ave. Communication Issue DSN11/1/10 1:00 PM 36th Ave. Communication Issue DSN11/1/10 5:00 PM 36th Ave. Communication Issue DSN




11/5/10 8:30 AM Bass Lake Connection to cabinet unhooked DSN11/5/10 1:00 PM Bass Lake Connection to cabinet unhooked DSN11/5/10 5:00 PM Bass Lake Connection to cabinet unhooked DSN







14












15












16












17









APPENDIX C SYSTEM ACCEPTANCE TEST RESULTS




APPENDIX D STREETWAVE TRAVEL TIME RESULT

VALIDITY



TABLE 1. 36TH AVE. TO 42ND AVE. RESULTS

Random Number Travel Time Speed Standard Deviation of Speed Average Range in Running Speed6 91 39.9 16.05937712 110 33.0 6.9 Runs Needed for 1.0 mph Error15 87 41.7 8.7 434 352 10.3 31.4 Runs Needed for 2.0 mph Error

Last‐First AM Peak SummaryOctober 13th Results

31 132 27.5 17.2 1664.2

Random Number Travel Time Speed Standard Deviation of Speed Average Range in Running Speed140 105 34.6 6.65164943668 94 38.6 4.0 Runs Needed for 1.0 mph Error18 111 32.7 5.9 1386 125 29.1 3.7 Runs Needed for 2.0 mph Error61 120 30.3 1.2 6104 180 20.2 10.125 186 19.5 0.757 110 33.0 13.5130 77 47.2 14.1

53.2

Random Number Travel Time Speed Standard Deviation of Speed Average Range in Running Speed62 100 36.3 9.2084830360 117 31.0 5.3 Runs Needed for 1.0 mph Error115 86 42.2 11.2 19

Last‐First Off Peak Summary

Last‐First PM Peak Summary




TABLE 2. 42ND AVE. TO BASS LAKE ROAD RESULTS

Random Number Travel Time Speed Standard Deviation of Speed Average Range in Running Speed19 156 42.78 5.5211791633 140 47.7 4.9 Runs Needed for 1.0 mph Error2 146 45.7 2.0 1010 167 40.0 5.7 Runs Needed for 2.0 mph Error16 219 30.5 9.5 5

22.1


52.0


35.3


Last‐First AM Peak Summary


October 13th Results




TABLE 3. BASS LAKE ROAD TO 63RD AVE. RESULTS


72.2


211.1


33.4








TABLE 4. 63RD AVE. TO 71ST AVE. RESULTS


50.7


92.8


50.4

Last‐First AM Peak SummaryOctober 13th Results






TABLE 5. 71ST AVE. TO GREENHAVEN DR. RESULTS


49.8


64.0


45.9








TABLE 6. GREENHAVEN DR. TO 71ST AVE. RESULTS


57.2


99.1









TABLE 7. 71ST AVE. TO 63RD AVE. RESULTS


33.5


77.6


88.4








TABLE 8. 63RD AVE. TO BASS LAKE ROAD RESULTS


43.9


87.0









TABLE 9. BASS LAKE ROAD TO 42ND AVE. RESULTS


32.5


48.2


32.5








TABLE 10. 42ND AVE. TO 36TH AVE. RESULTS


14.8


49.4


74.3






AM Peak(6:30 AM – 9:00 AM)

Off Peak(9:01 AM – 3:00 PM)

PM Peak(3:01 PM – 6:30 PM)

78 81

135

173

85

159

Southbound42nd Ave. to 36th Ave.

Last-Last

192

201 215

130

200

151

SouthboundBass Lake Road to 42nd Ave.

Last-Last

AM Peak(6:30 AM – 9:00 AM)


PM Peak(3:01 PM – 6:30 PM)

Southbound63rd Ave. to Bass Lake Road

Last-Last

AM Peak(6:30 AM – 9:00 AM)


PM Peak(3:01 PM – 6:30 PM)

80 84

184 188

81

173

AM Peak(6:30 AM – 9:00 AM)


PM Peak(3:01 PM – 6:30 PM)

81

164

152

82

138

105

Southbound71st Ave. to 63rd Ave.

Last-Last

SouthboundGreenhaven Ave. to 71st Ave.

Last-Last

AM Peak(6:30 AM – 9:00 AM)


PM Peak(3:01 PM – 6:30 PM)

110

146

254

120

260

SouthboundGreenhaven Ave. to 36th Ave.

Last-Last

AM Peak(6:30 AM – 9:00 AM)


PM Peak(3:01 PM – 6:30 PM)

637614

857

669

781

857

Northbound36th Ave. to 42nd Ave.

Last-Last

AM Peak(6:30 AM – 9:00 AM)


PM Peak(3:01 PM – 6:30 PM)

99

122

159

101

154

109

189

218

310

181

217

165

Northbound42nd Ave. to Bass Lake Road

Last-Last

AM Peak(6:30 AM – 9:00 AM)


PM Peak(3:01 PM – 6:30 PM)

NorthboundBass Lake Road to 63rd Ave.

Last-Last

AM Peak(6:30 AM – 9:00 AM)


PM Peak(3:01 PM – 6:30 PM)

105 105

174

154

130

242

Northbound63rd Ave. to 71st Ave.

Last-Last

AM Peak(6:30 AM – 9:00 AM)


PM Peak(3:01 PM – 6:30 PM)

77 75

135

159

94

Northbound71st Ave. to Greenhaven Ave.

Last-Last

AM Peak(6:30 AM – 9:00 AM)


PM Peak(3:01 PM – 6:30 PM)

9889

204

176

104

230

AM Peak(6:30 AM – 9:00 AM)


PM Peak(3:01 PM – 6:30 PM)

630602

750

892

728

945

Northbound36th Ave. to Greenhaven Ave.

Last-Last

submitted to: minnesota department of transportation (mn/dot)

Documents