Conclusions - Centro Rodoviário Português

Active Road Management
Assisted by Satellite
ARMAS Phase II
Overview, Findings and
Conclusions
IV Congresso Rodoviário Português
April 2006
1
1
Table of Contents
ƒ
Overview
ƒ
System Architecture
ƒ
Road Usage and Charging Determination
ƒ
Field Trials
ƒ
Conclusions
ƒ
Project Achievements and Future
2
2
Table of Contents
ƒ
Overview
ƒ
System Architecture
ƒ
Road Usage and Charging Determination
ƒ
Field Trials
ƒ
Conclusions
ƒ
Project Achievements and Future
3
3
Overview of ARMAS
•
Technical Feasibility;
•
Detailed analysis of key
project “Active
identified
in Phase I;Road
issues
• European Space Agency’s (ESA)
Management Assisted by Satellite” (ARMAS) aims at
• High-Level Architecture;
transforming the transport infrastructure
bridges, for
• Development(roads,
of a demonstrator
tunnels, urban areas) into safer and
more functionalities:
customer-friendly
the selected
• Legal Issues (Privacy, Liability);
environments, by:
•“EFC
based
on
Satellite
Positioning”;
– Improving
Safety;
• “Rough
prototypes”
developed for
•“Warnings Provision”;
main
entities;
– Increasing
Dynamic Traffic Management
capabilities;
•“SOS Request”;
– Providing Electronic Fee Collection mechanisms;
ARMAS Phase I
ARMAS Phase II
Feasibility Study
Test-bed development
focused on “EFC based
in Satellite
Positioning”
Time Frame
Phase I
Mar 03
Phase II
Dec 03
Mar 04
Dec 05
4
4
Overview of ARMAS
• “EFC based on Satellite Positioning”
–
–
–
–
Corridor Pricing/Passage Tolling;
Congestion Zones/Cordon Pricing;
Distance Based Pricing;
Combination;
• “Warnings Provision”
– Provide information about hazards on the
road ahead to the driver.
• “SOS Request”
– Electronic SOS request from inside
the car:
• By the driver;
• Triggered
automatically
sensors.
by
car
5
5
Table of Contents
ƒ
Overview
ƒ
Project Logic
ƒ
System Architecture
ƒ
Road Usage and Charging Determination
ƒ
Field Trials
ƒ
Conclusions
ƒ
Project Achievements and Future
6
6
System Architecture
GPS, EGNOS Æ Galileo
pm
i
u
a
o
R
DSRC
t
n
e
GSM, GPRS Æ UMTS
Eq
l
ra art
t
n
P
Ce edd
x
an S Fi
d e M A AF P
i
S
dAR
On-Board Unit
In-Car System
ICS
7
7
System Architecture
EGNOS over
GPRS
EGNOS SiS
GPS SiS
ISO 17575
GPRS
GPS +
EGNOS
DSRC
Kalma
n
Filter
Inertial
Sensors
DSRC
CESARE II
DSRC Road
Usage
Map Matching
Map Matching
Feature
Matching
Route
Matching
Charge
Calculation
Road
Usage
8
8
ARMAS: ICS Prototype
9
9
Table of Contents
ƒ
Overview
ƒ
System Architecture
ƒ
Road Usage and Charging Determination
ƒ
Field Trials
ƒ
Conclusions
ƒ
Project Achievements and Future
10
10
ARMAS: Charging Concepts - Integrity
•
Integrity is measured by the
Protection Level (PL)
•
The Protection Level bounds the
error in meters in the positioning
given by the GNSS receiver;
•
Defines a circle with center in the
given position with radius equal
to PL;
•
The real position is within the
circle with 99,9999% certainty.
•
The PL is determined by the
receiver depending on:
– Satelite geometry
– Pseudo-Range errors
PL
99,9999 %
11
11
HPL and Road Usage Determination
Crossed
Gantry
with
Edge
Crossed
Crossed
of Gantry
Gantry
Gantry
with
with
with
Map-matching
selects
Medium
HPL
High
LowPositions
HPL
High
HPL
Collected
Gantries
final route
Probable
Very
Likely
Candidate
Less
Unlikely
Probable
Candidate
Candidate
12
12
ARMAS: Charging Concepts
Small HPL
Large
Can be
Can’t
besure
surethe
thecar
car
is
zone
isoutside
inside zone
13
13
Table of Contents
ƒ
Overview
ƒ
System Architecture
ƒ
Road Usage and Charging Determination
ƒ
Field Trials
ƒ
Conclusions
ƒ
Project Achievements and Future
14
14
Field Trials
• The trials were conducted covering a large area of Lisbon city and
greater Lisbon area, methodically covering the same ground day
after day, having established three different scenarios:
- Dense Urban (“Baixa Pombalina”): Driving through downtown
narrow streets and avenues having dense foliage;
- Urban: Driving through large avenues and wider streets.
- Rural: Following highways around Lisbon and passing places with
a low or none density of buildings/trees.
• Three different times of the day were also established in order to
prove the system against different ionosphere activity periods and in
different traffic density situations:
- Afternoon: Highly charged ionosphere. Medium traffic density.
- Evening: Transitional period of the ionosphere. Heavy traffic
situation.
- Night: Lowest state of the ionosphere activity. Low traffic
density.
15
15
Field Trials Scenario
16
16
Field Trials: Congestion Zone in Dense Urban Scenario
Congestion
Charge
Zone
17
17
Field Trials: Congestion Zone in Urban Scenario
Congestion
Charge
Zone
18
18
Trial Run Result Example: Dense Urban Scenario
19
19
Trial Run Result Example: Urban Scenario
20
20
Trial Run Result Example: Bridge “Vasco da Gama”
21
21
Road Centreline Truth Source: Accuracy
ICS ACCURACY (COMPARED AGAINST ROAD CENTRELINE) (metres)
Geographic Scenario
Global
Time of Day
Dense
Urban
Urban
Rural
Day
Twilight
Night
AVERAGE
8,62
17,25
6,43
4,07
10,61
6,09
6,17
STD
DEVIATION
22,14
38,20
7,93
5,18
27,70
9,47
13,31
PERCENTILE
75
8,12
17,27
8,50
5,28
9,73
6,80
6,38
PERCENTILE
95
25,70
55,81
18,71
10,17
34,97
19,78
18,42
PERCENTILE
99
81,99
194,24
32,76
15,34
111,62
46,54
56,39
MAXIMUM
820,37
820,37
147,62
109,86
820,37
200,20
289,29
MINIMUM
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
22
22
Road Centreline Truth Source: Latency
ICS LATENCY (COMPARED AGAINST ROAD CENTRELINE) (seconds)
Geographic Scenario
Global
Time of Day
Dense
Urban
Urban
Rural
Day
Twilight
Night
Error <
3m
2,66
4,21
2,69
2,10
2,96
2,51
2,23
Error <
8m
1,34
1,89
1,39
1,10
1,45
1,23
1,22
Error <
20m
1,08
1,26
1,05
1,00
1,11
1,04
1,05
Error <
50m
1,02
1,07
1,01
1,00
1,03
1,01
1,01
23
23
Table of Contents
ƒ
Overview
ƒ
System Architecture
ƒ
Road Usage and Charging Determination
ƒ
Field Trials
ƒ
Conclusions
ƒ
Project Achievements and Future
24
24
Conclusions: Overview
• As expected, the “GPS+EGNOS+INS” positioning solution is
appropriate for the tested tolling situations. Accurate charging
was produced although an extensive trial with a large number of
vehicles is necessary for statistical validity.
• The only environment where the results are not optimal is the
Dense Urban where, as expected, the performance of the system
becomes heavily dependant on the performance of the INS, MapMatching Algorithms and if applicable, tolling scenario (e.g. the
definition of the “Charging Zone” boundaries).
• The other two system functionalities, “SOS Request” and
“Warnings Provision” were easily implemented using the base
tolling platform which proves that the approach followed is valid
for providing more service and business oriented functionalities to
the end customer.
• Besides being the basis of the “Integrity concept” of the system,
EGNOS improved also the accuracy of the positioning.
25
25
Conclusions: Overview
• GPRS proved to be enough for uploading the charge-related
data gathered in the OBU.
• However, for the dissemination of EGNOS based on
SISNeT, the GPRS communication channel showed some
problems:
– High latency;
– Low bandwidth;
– Coverage problems;
• We concluded that in order to be able to have a reliable and
complete EGNOS feed the ideal solution would be
transmission based on radio broadcast such as RDS or DAB
although UMTS should already bring a very noticeable
improvement.
26
26
Table of Contents
ƒ
Overview
ƒ
System Architecture
ƒ
Road Usage and Charging Determination
ƒ
Field Trials
ƒ
Conclusions
ƒ
Project Achievements and Future
27
27
Project Achievements
• ICS prototypes + AFP prototype (with COTS hardware) made
available for further testing and trials;
• Platform able to test several diferent scenarios and applications;
• Hands-on knowledge of the problems/benefits of the use of ISO
17575 and MISTER;
• Field Trial data that raised several issues but overall confirmed the
validity of the project choices;
• Comprehensive body of knowledge about all the technical issues
related with EFC based in GNSS;
• Enabling the consortia members to engage with key industry
stakeholders;
28
28
ARMAS Phase III
– Downscale ICS equipment in cost and size;
– Extensive User Trials in Portugal, Ireland and The Netherlands
(30+ vehicles during 3 months in Portugal for instance);
– Comparison of performance of ARMAS against today’s leading
toll technologies;
– Demonstration of Secondary Services:
•
•
•
•
•
Traffic Management;
Children and Youth Transportation;
Dangerous Goods Transportation;
PAYD insurance
Incident management
ARMAS Phase III
Extensive User Trials
with Comparison with
leading Toll
technologies
Phase III
Q2 2004
29
29
Thank you. Questions?
Paulo Alexandre Gomes
Paulo André
João Canário
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Av. D. João II, Lote 1.17.02, Torre Fernão Magalhães - 7º
1998 - 025 Lisboa Portugal
Tel: +351 21 382 93 66 Fax: +351 21 386 64 93
http://www.skysoft.pt
Project Web Site:
http://armasII.skysoft.pt
30
30