motivation, high level description for a portable ids system lee alexander pi-ming cheng alec...
TRANSCRIPT
Motivation, high level description for a portable IDS system
Lee AlexanderPi-Ming Cheng Alec GorjestaniArvind Menon
Craig ShankwitzIntelligent Vehicles LabUniversity of Minnesota
Original Program
Crash analysis (done by CH2MHill) Identification of problematic intersections in
partner states (done by CH2MHill) Design of a local surveillance system for each
state who chooses to have one States build intersection to our specs. We bring it on line We collect, archive, and analyze data. States ready to add Driver Infrastructure
Interface for Field Testing.
What we know now.
What we do know about state’s crashes CH2MHill crash analysis indicated the crash
characteristics similar in the states he has analyzed• Far side crashes• Drivers stopping and making subsequent bad decisions• No strong correlation to geometry or sightlines• Still don’t know one step or two for left/straight through
maneuvers
Meeting on 18 January States indicated not much interest in the investment
of a surveillance system without active signage States would like to test the fully functional system.
What we don’t know
Differences in driver behavior as a function of state/region
Need to quantify driver behavior to Make sure we’re not missing anything Develop a “universal” driver interface which will work
in all regions of the county
How do we answer these questions? Portable IDS surveillance system
How do we find out?
Portable IDS surveillance system Take/ship system components to partner states Work with each state DOT to install system
• Establish design early on all states can agree with
Collect data for one month• State DOTs assist with system maintenance
Fuelling generators Basic infrastructure support
• Sensor mounts, theft protection Checking for vandalism / crash damage (possibly) rebooting system (unlikely)
Can we do this?
States approve change of scope Need to determine the level of involvement
states willing to assume More involvement, less overall cost, more bang for
“our” buck Need to determine specific outcomes expected by
states.
Program budget
Original project budget: $430K 8 States promised would be $504K Spent so far: ~ $75K (CH2MHill crash analysis,
meetings, initial portable system design) Encumbered: ~$105
CH2MHill remaining analysis, project salaries Leaves: $250K
~$175K system hardware & construction ~$35K travel and system shipments ~$40K salaries for data analysis and report writing
Program budget: Assumptions
State DOTs willing to visit site, refuel, check system status? Saves project cost of having U personnel on site System to be designed to require minimal external
effort (Lee’s presentation)
DOTs allow laser scanners in median for crossroads surveillance? Saves HUGE cost of IR cameras and masts. Much better tracking performance.
Program budget: Assumptions
State DOTs willing to supply basic infrastructure? Power for main system trailer? (we can do generator, too) 3#U channel for mounting sensors
• Saves shipping costs, provides a measure of security for the equipment (looks permanent, not a target)
Program Modification
What do the states receive? Quantification of the gaps drivers take at their intersection (look
Gaussian, but means/variance vary quite a bit) Measure of the interaction between minor road and major road
traffic Report documenting their intersection A Head-start on the deployment of the full system in their state One channel of video to record intersections
Solicit commitments?
Follow Up from Last Meeting
Vehicle classification performance improvement Crossroads surveillance performance
improvement.
Crossroads Surveillance: Before and After
Before: Open Issue January : only capture 2/3 straight-thru maneuver
Now: Issue resolved Extra radar aimed at crossroads detects vehicle
motion, eliminates false maneuvers
Future: not use cameras in crossroads Loop detectors in permanent locations Laser scanners in median Approach taken with the portable site