- Complete Trip – ITS4US Deployment
- Vehicle-to-Infrastructure Resources
- Connected Vehicle Pilots
- Connected Vehicle News and Events
- Connected Vehicle Deployer Resources
- Connected Vehicle Deployment Assistance
- Connected Vehicle Applications
- Sample Deployment Concepts
- Connected Vehicle Publications
- National ITS Architecture
- Smart City Challenge
Wyoming DOT (WYDOT) Connected Vehicle Pilot Webinar: Deployment Results and Lessons Learned
1. What is the difference between the SDX and the SDC?
The SDX (Situation Data Exchange) is used to disseminate TIMs (to SiriusXM and others), the SDC (Secure Data Commons) is a secure repository hosted by USDOT to send the pilots full data set (including PII info) for the independent evaluators to use
2. What approaches has WYDOT taken in order to determine how reliable a system or vendor is – such as any QA guidance?
Is it done by the agency or is sub to any consultant who performed the analysis? This is done by the Vendor first, then validated by the CVP test team. Depending on the changes made testing will verify each fundamental end to end connection and then a deep dive into each function that is updated. This provides a balance between level of effort and confidence in equipment function. Then after testing is complete (bench), the test is pushed to production equipment in the friendly fleet for live testing for a 1-2 week period, once accepted then the new code is pushed out across the environment.
3. How did the FCC decision affect this project?
Dramatically, critical vendors left the CV space, DSRC devices had to be turn off to support abandoning the lower 45 MHz, the transition plan could not be used as the RSUs and OBUs could no longer function.
4. Are you planning to switch to C-V2X?
Yes, we are looking at migrating to a limited implementation of C-V2X for RSUs and a few OBUs.
5. It looks like the results of the speed compliance app was inconclusive. Is there any further discussion on what was observed?
Yes, we found we could efficiently push the message to the cab, next steps are to optimize the OBU interface (for OEMs to do) and solidify the TMC message generation.
6. What was the drivers' reaction to the system?
The drivers were able to validate messages got to the cab in a timely manner. They requested better information and a more optimized interface for the data. For example work zone information was too generic.
7. With the DSRC RSU being turned off, can the fleets continue to receive Traveler Information Messages?
Yes and No. They can from satellite, but not from RSUs.
8. What was the CV penetration rate during storms when improved speed compliance was observed?
We had pretty low penetration since we equipped over 320 vehicles. However, we actually looked at a particular connected vehicle's performance on the network during severe events. Speed compliance improved as the penetration rate increased throughout the deployment period.
9. How are the alerts delivered to the drivers? Cell phone, text, CMS, etc.?
The alerts were shared directly to the vehicles’ onboard units, so drivers received the alerts through the Human Machine Interfaces (e.g., tablets).
10. What was the source for the work zone alert data - how accurate was this data?
This is an area where we learned we simply cannot provide construction/work zone data as we have in the past. The information came from WYDOT employees who work the construction zones and from construction project data. This does not address real-time needs adequately. We need significant changes to our work zone process in order to provide quality in-vehicle information.
11. What was the split of fleet vs friendly?
About 40% friendly and 60% fleet
12. Does the percentage of TIMs not received by any OBU simply reflect the fact that no vehicle was near the location of that alert during the time that it was active, or are there other technical factors in play that affect the reliability of receipt of a TIM via satellite?
This could be one of the reasons. Other reasons could include the production of a TIM that was not shared through satellite, issues with certifications, potential failures with OBUs, etc.
13. Do you recommend that Highway Patrol review/certify any HMI systems?
Yes, highway patrol are often required to drive at high speed under workload regardless of the road and weather conditions.
14. Can you please share a link to the award winning paper mentioned?
The report is available here: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0361198120910743
15. Have you considered the Work Zone Exchange WZDx data? Did you face challenges there? https://www.transportation.gov/av/data/wzdx
We used our existing construction reporting system that was not WZDX-complaint. Remember that this project started in 2015. We have plans change our construction reporting to be WZDX-compliant. I have to say that simply creating a WZDX-compliant data feed is not sufficient to provide in-vehicle information. We really need a cultural shift so that our construction teams think of work zone data as part of their functions.
16. Any reason for not using LTE?
LTE coverage in Wyoming is pretty spotty - satellite delivery allowed us to gain 100% coverage of roadways in Wyoming without coverage gaps. That said - LTE is certainly a legitimate path for delivery.
17. How does having a commercial vehicle having an additional OBU to the mandated ELD not create more distraction for the CV driver dealing with both messages to the OBU and to the ELD?
An HMI with less frequent warnings and messages was the best design to reduce distraction.
18. What is the potential for commercialization of OBUs for four-wheelers (passenger/commercial)? Are these going to be the norm, or will a TCU+V2X OBU be a successful model?
As a public agency, this is not WYDOT’s space. This is a question for equipment manufactures and tier 1 suppliers.