Central Based Transit Signal Priority Deployment NYC s TSP System for Select Bus Service (SBS)

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Central Based Transit Signal Priority Deployment NYC s TSP System for Select Bus Service (SBS)"

Robert Alexander
5 years ago
Views:

1 Central Based Transit Signal Priority Deployment NYC s TSP System for Select Bus Service (SBS) TSP Deployment Without the Expensive Infrastructure Bob Rausch, P.E. Vice President TransCore, ITS

2 Outline Background TSP History NYC Infrastructure Architecture for Central TSP Messaging Details Communications Performance Issues and Lessons Learned

3 3 Consider the Following Most new transit fleet vehicles Typically include GPS tracking Accurate location mechanisms Broad-band, wide area communications Significant available on-board processing capabilities On-board data bus structure for fare collection, engine monitoring, security, signage, etc.

4 4 Other Trends Smarter, faster controllers - ATC High Speed IP Network connection to street Availability of wide area, broad-band, ubiquitous communications (4G, LTE, etc.) Availability of open Standards (NTCIP) Traffic Management Systems support EVP routing and conflict resolution Dynamic routing based on traffic conditions Transit Signal Priority Management (NTCIP 1211)

5 5 NYC TSP History NYC DOT Manages > 12,600 signalized intersections MTA/NYCT fleet ~6,000 Busses > 5,000 on the time Performed TSP trials & 2.4 GHZ RF/GPS Based Using traditional infrastructure based technology

6 Typical Intersection Advanced Transportation Controller (ATC) standards. As of 10/13/ ,627 intersections under computer control MIMO Antenna Wireless Router All wireless network 150 ms typical Latency Adopted NTCIP standards for all communications All Controllers support TSP (remote activation)

7 7 Victory Boulevard Trials

8 8 Fordham Road Trials

9 9 Results Improvements 15-23% travel time Signal optimization TSP Operation But Capital Cost was prohibitive Both were proprietary systems $~3,500 per intersection (actually ~$5-$12K) $~2,000 per bus

Traffic Control System Transit Management Systems TSP

10 10 Revised Architecture Overview Workstation for Remote Access (reports, status) Traffic Management Center Fiber Traffic Control System Transit Management Systems TSP Server Wireless Media (NYC-NYCWiN and 4G Verizon) GPS Traffic Controller

11 11 In-Vehicle Operation Tracks Location (including Street Name) Transmits TSP Request At Appropriate Location Retries Transmissions if necessary Transmits TSP Clear At Appropriate Location Retries Transmissions if necessary Knows Intersection ID for intersection it is approaching 4G Configured: Location to transmit request Location to transmit clear Specific strategy to request GPS

12 12 Transit Center Actions Evaluates the priority structure Manages conflicts Manages revenue/non revenue Manages Time-schedule adherence Manages TOD rules Formats standard message for TMC Sends request to the TMC systems Logs request information Configures Vehicle Systems Trigger points and Average Speed expected

13 13 TMC Actions Evaluates request based on Location Time of Day Route ID Roadway Intersection Determines whether to send Request to Traffic Controller Logs request information for analysis Converts Time Stamp to TMC time (which is based on the eastern power grid not GPS) note intersections use TMC time for all actions. Sends request to the Traffic Controller (ATC)

14 14 Message Types TSP Request initial TSP request message Request ID, Vehicle ID, Vehicle Class (Bus, BRT, etc.), Vehicle Priority, Strategy number, Vehicle Speed, Vehicle Route ID, Intersection ID, Current vehicle location, Time-to-apply (UTC time), Time of service desired (Relative to TTA), Time of estimated departure, Time to live TSP Update Request if things change Same as the Request Message TSP Clear Request Request ID, Vehicle ID, Vehicle Class, Vehicle Priority, Strategy number, Intersection ID

15 15 Contents of Priority Request Message nycintersectionid protocolversion priorityrequesttimetolivevalue messagetype priorityrequestvehicleroutelength messagelength priorityrequestvehicleroute priorityrequestid vehiclelocationlatitude priorityrequestorigin vehiclelocationlongitude priorityrequestvehicleidlength vehiclespeed (at time of request) priorityrequestvehicleid priorityrequestvehicleclasstype priorityrequestvehicleclasslevel priorityrequestservicestrategynumber priorityrequestvehicleroutelength priorityrequesttimetoapply priorityrequesttimeofestimateddeparture

16 16 Typical Acknowledge Message 0 request received 1 invalid protocol version 2 invalid message type 3 invalid message length 4 invalid vehicle ID 5 invalid intersection ID 6 no matching message 7 TSP disabled for the intersection 8 vehicle outside of configured request area 9 request received, accepted and queued protocolversion messagetype messagelength priorityrequestid priorityrequestvehicleidlength priorityrequestvehicleid priorityrequestvehicleclasstype priorityrequestservicestrategynumber priorityresponsestatus

17 17 Special Conditions for Timing Time-to-apply (UTC time from bus) Absolute time (seconds since 1/1/1970 ) Supports variable latency Configuration allows up to a 2 second delay for end-to-end communications Allows for retransmission currently 700 ms for lost packets Traffic Control uses Line Frequency Clock (LFC) TMC translates from UTC time to LFC Note that LFC wanders but does not drift (<22 Sec)

18 18 Intersection Operations Typical Strategies supported Green Truncation (Conflicting phases) Green Extension (Bus phase) Phase Skip/Omit Protected Bus only left turn Queue Jump Actual capabilities: ASC vendor dependent Need to support remote TSP request message NTCIP to configure TSP operation for each strategy

19 19

20 20

21 21 TSP Active 21

22 22 Example of measured trigger point data 0FC7 SB - WATER JOHN ST.

23 23 Observations & Lessons Learned NYCWiN provides about 125 ms round-trip delays (TMC ASTC TMC) 4G from Verizon provides about 650 ms round trip delay (veh TRC veh) Vehicle Location mechanisms are critical; GPS alone is not adequate. Need to add: Dead Reckoning, Connection to the Vehicle Information and possibly Map Matching Messages tend to be bunched (4G) Bandwidth required for all buses is minor!

24 24 Example of Operations Analysis Use location information to evaluate effectiveness of trigger points Vehicle uses projected average speed and distance to adjust transmit TSP request.

25 25 25 Summary NYCDOT needed to support TSP but infrastructure cost was prohibitive NYCWiN provides a sub-second, low latency media: TMC-to-intersection MTA already had a 4G wireless connection to their Transit Center TSP server allows NYCDOT to determine rules for application Approach requires NO additional intersection infrastructure!! NYC has extended to 7 SBS routes and is rapidly adding more!

26 26 AVL Map for Transit Vehicles

27 27 TSP Database reports Performance Evaluation

28 28 Next Steps Developing a series of analysis reports Developing an automated interface TMC-TRC Update TOD schedule for TSP Update trigger points and speed Already added vehicle tracking at the TMC Results have continued to be about the same

29 Example Travel Time Reductions 29 S79 SBS/ Hylan Blvd

30 30 Thank you? Bob Rausch, P.E. Vice President

Open Transit Priority Systems. February 18, 2016

Open Transit Priority Systems. February 18, 2016 Open Transit Priority Systems February 18, 2016 Agenda Transit Signal Priority Overview Project Overview Specification Development Virtual Test Tool Next Steps Questions 2 Transit Signal Priority (TSP)