Transit Signal Priority in the Denver Metro. Bart Przybyl, P.E., PTOE

Transcription

1 Transit Signal Priority in the Denver Metro Bart Przybyl, P.E., PTOE

2 BACKGROUND DRCOG Denver Regional Council of Governments RTD Regional Transportation District (Transit Authority) 2007 DRCOG/RTD Transit Signal Priority Study Comprehensive TSP study, including an evaluation of potential technologies, corridors Utilized VISSIM to measure potential TSP benefits on many corridors Identified 13 potential test beds DRCOG identified three pilot projects and provided funding Colorado Boulevard Route 40 RFID JUMP Route Opticom HOP Route Centralized

3 COLORADO BOULEVARD ROUTE 40 Colorado Boulevard 6 lane Principal Arterial in Urban Denver Route operated by RTD, project implemented by City and County of Denver in signalized intersections, 2 interchange ramp intersections (I 25), 8 transit stops in each direction Off peak implementation, 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. TSP early green/green extension maximums set to 10 seconds

4 COLORADO BOULEVARD ROUTE 40 Utilizes RFID technology onboard transponders read by wayside readers Spread spectrum communications between readers and radio/contact closures in the controller cabinet Conditionality was only implemented on the traffic controller side Pedestrian calls inhibit TSP Re service inhibit interval of 2 cycles

5 COLORADO BOULEVARD ROUTE 40 Extensive evaluation completed in 2013 No significant improvement in transit travel time and minor improvements in on time reliability No significant negative impact to cross street delay or vehicular travel times 50 percent detection rate 17 percent TSP activation rate

6 COLORADO BOULEVARD ROUTE 40 Poor detection: Dead batteries in hard case RFID transponders, errors in RFID database Small cone of vision of readers, difficult to capture moving vehicles that may be changing lanes Restrictive signal timing, limited opportunities for TSP Off peak implementation results in smaller opportunity for transit benefits High capital cost, no check out detection due to cost Maintenance concerns

7 JUMP ROUTE State Highway 7 2 to 4 lane highway in rural Boulder County Route operated by RTD, project implemented by City of Boulder, Boulder County, and the Colorado Department of Transportation in intersections All day TSP maximums set at 10 seconds for early green and 15 seconds for green extension

8 JUMP ROUTE Small dedicated fleet due to branding Utilizes Opticom technology Emitters installed on bus fleet Detectors installed at intersections Phase selectors installed in traffic signal controller cabinets

9 JUMP ROUTE No evaluation performed to determine transit benefits Implementation issues: High level of coordination necessary due to 4 agencies Incorrect phase selector settings, buses triggered preemption No check out capability in 170/Wapiti controller software Maintenance concerns Emitters always on, will shorten lifespan Difficult to monitor if system is working correctly

10 HOP ROUTE 5.5 mile loop route in City of Boulder core Operated by Special Transit, implementation being performed by Special Transit and City of Boulder 7 intersections All day TSP parameters not yet finalized

11 HOP ROUTE Fleet of 10 dedicated buses Onboard CAD/AVL system with GPS and spread spectrum radios, repeaters located along the route Special Transit tracks location of all buses in their Transit Management Center Utilizes live dispatcher to maintain correct headways and schedule adherence

12 HOP ROUTE Centralized system TSP system will utilize existing GPS location data Data will be fed into Priority Request Generator (PRG), which will review bus location and trigger TSP requests based on geo fenced check in/check out zones PRG software currently under development Requests will be routed to City of Boulder Traffic Management Center and their central traffic signal system Central system will initiate TSP at intersections via Ethernet communications

13 HOP ROUTE

14 HOP ROUTE Unique circumstances to allow for proposed centralized TSP system Small dedicated fleet has CAD/AVL and GPS equipment Location information is communicated to Special Transit TMC every 2 seconds All traffic signals located within one jurisdiction with central traffic signal system Ethernet communications to all traffic signals As a result, difficult to implement in other areas where these conditions don t exist

15 US 36 TRANSIT SIGNAL PRIORITY STUDY Study started in late 2011 Part 1 Study TSP benefits for regional transit service along US 36 between Denver and Boulder 8 off ramp intersections at 4 interchanges Part 2 Evaluate the three pilot TSP projects and identify the preferred technology moving forward

16 RTD ENHANCEMENTS Since the 2007 study, RTD has performed several improvements to entire fleet of 1,200+ buses Installed INIT CAD/AVL system GPS system in combination with odometer readings, accurate to +/ 10 feet Wireless gateway with WiFi and cellular modems

17 US 36 TRANSIT SIGNAL PRIORITY STUDY Study identified a cellular TSP concept as the preferred technology Would leverage recent CAD/AVL procurement, minimize capital costs, and improve upon issues identified through the three pilot projects Untested concept, needed to be vetted further Opticom would serve as Plan B

18 CELLULAR TSP SYSTEM Will utilize on board CAD/AVL system and GPS location information to track bus location Geographic check in and check out zones will be defined in the onboard database (point with radius) CAD/AVL system will trigger TSP requests when bus enters check in and check out zones

19 CELLULAR TSP SYSTEM TSP request will be a XML command sent to specific IP address associated with each check in zone/intersection XML command will trigger correct port in contact closure for 30 seconds After 30 seconds, the contact closure will terminate the output in case the check out location is not reached Controller can inhibit TSP depending on programming

20 CELLULAR TSP SYSTEM Modem and contact closure to be mounted in a separate cabinet Allow access by each agency to perform maintenance on their equipment

21 CELLULAR TSP SYSTEM Proposed system has many advantages: Leverages recent CAD/AVL system procurement, no additional equipment on buses Minimal capital cost at each location (small cabinet, modem, contact closure) Check in/check out zone locations can be easily adjusted Distributed, does not require central system Can be conditional (ie. only when bus is running behind, minimum number of passengers) Compatible with all controllers System can be monitored and evaluated Maintenance is simplified, each agency has easy access to their equipment Can be used for other applications (queue jumps, etc.)

22 CELLULAR TSP SYSTEM Several tests have been performed to evaluate the proposed system Latency test in cellular communication path < 0.5 seconds (Passed) Bench testing of cellular modems and contact closure, completed in late 2013 (Passed)

23 NEXT STEPS RTD/INIT to complete software modifications to CAD/AVL system Bench test the entire system Field implementation at test location(s) Implementation along East Colfax Avenue

24 EAST COLFAX AVENUE Transit Priority Study completed in early mile segment of urban arterial in City and County of Denver 13 locations Study found potential travel time savings of 30 to 120 seconds (3 to 10 percent) Project estimated cost of $520,000 Includes traffic signal cabinet and controller replacement

25 QUESTIONS?