Emergency Vehicle Preemption & Evaluation Procedures

Background
Standing in for Juan Morales on presenting FHWA TReL study on Preemption in Northern, VA. Added state of the practicein signal preemption/priority to talk.

Outline
Proceed with assumption that NTCIP Preemption objects represent a generic state of the practicefunctionality. Discuss features/limitations of NTCIP Object Summarize/recap recent evaluation work.
3

State of the Practice - NTCIP

NTCIP TS 3.5 represents
A basic agreed upon terminology and parameters that agencies can specify. A vendor neutral set of definitions. A framework for system operation An open architecture for expanding the state of practice.

TS 3.5 Preemption Conformance Group

maxPreempts (TS 3.5, 2.7.1) preemptTable (TS 3.5, 2.7.2)
Following slides based upon my interpretation of specification - I have not had any first hand experience exercisinga controller with these features.

Table of Preempt Parameters

Number Control ** Link ** Delay MinDuration MinGreen MinWalk EnterPedClear (min)DwellGreen MaxPresense Octets TrackPhase DwellPhase DwellPed ExitPhase Status Info State **
6

TrackGreen

2.7.2.2 Preempt Control

Variable containing following flags Lock/Non Locking Calls Determine if a preempt overrides an automatic flash Determine if a higher numbered (active) preempt should be overridden. Phases listed in DwellPhase to flash yellow during Dwell phase (others flash red)

2.7.2.3 Preempt Link

Object provides a means to define a higher priority preempt to be combined (linked) with this preempt. At the end of Dwell time, the linked preempt shall receive an automatic call which shall be maintained as long as the demand for this preempt is active. Provides a procedure for constructing a more complex sequence then TrkClr/Dwell
8

2.7.2.16 Preempt State

no active notActive(but)WithCall entryStarted trackService dwell linkActive exitStarted maxPresence
9

other (not defined)

Where are we?

Base line definition of prioritized preemption (vendor neutral, so many new and innovative features such as bus-priority have not been fully defined)

10

Future
Existing TS 3.5 objects do not provide less aggressive manipulation of controller needed for transit priority, they need to be defined (Balke, Head). NTCIP Working Group and the Transit Standards Consortium on Traffic Signal Priority will draft new NTCIP objects.
11

Example Opportunities for Enhancement

Procedures for allocating extra time for a cycle or two to a particular phase after preemption terminates.
1 5 (18) 2 6 (56) 3 (23) 4 (23) (20) (54)

1 5 (20)

2 6

(56)

3 (23)

(54)

12

Evaluating the Impact of Preemption?

13

Problem Definition
Analyze the impact emergency vehicle preemption has on the operation of a coordinated-actuated signal system. Not a steady state problem traditional analytical models can not be used.

14

Concerns
Frequent preemtion can impose significant delays on preempted approaches One or two signals out of coordination can have a significant and lasting impact on an arterial performance s

15

Case Study I

16

ROUTE 7 - Loundoun, Virginia

To Leesburg
XEROX BLVD.

Ro ute 7

LANDSDOWNE BLVD.

Potom ac Ri ver

ASHBURN VILLAGE RD.

To Reston
17

Evaluation Equipment Configuration

Route 7 Signal Preemption Project
Obtained counts, and geometry Modeled network Obtained timings Configured 170 s Evaluated Perf.
CORSIM

Hardware in the Loop Simulation

Detector States

Simulated traffic actuates detectors and responds to phase indications

Signal States

19

Evaluation Environment

CIDs

20

Typical Emergency Vehicle Path

Route 7 - Loundoun, Virginia
N

Xerox Blvd.

Landsdowne Blvd.

Ashburn Village Rd.

21

Observed/Tabulated in TReL

22

One Preemption in 40
Intersections & Phases Prempted

Path

Travel Time Westbound Eastbound Travel Travel Time Time (sec) (sec)

Base case no preemptions 4 (4) 5(3), 4(2 & 5) 4( ), 3(2 & 5)

not preempted
H

197.3 198.1 197.3 195.6 194.8

208.6 212.1 215.9 206.7 207.6

23

4( 3(4)

not preempted

Two preemptions in 40
Intersections & Phases Prempted

Path

Travel Time Westbound Eastbound Travel Travel Tim e Tim e (sec) (sec)

Base case no preemptions 4 ( 4) 5 ( 2 & 5) 4 (2 & 5) 4( ), 3 ( 2 & 5)

not preempted
H

197.3 199.8 199.9 194.7

208.6 213.7 212.0 207.1

24

Observation/cautions
No significant impact to arterial or side streets. In this study, no more then 2 controllers are preempted at once. Relatively long intersection spacing platoon dispersion may reduce the impact of coordination.
25

Second Preemption Study

Applied evaluation protocol to an arterial with 4 relatively closely spaced intersections (700, 780, 1400). Evaluated both mid-day and afternoon peak conditions.

26

Study Location - SR 26

27

Evaluation Equipment

28

Preemption Paths

29

Preemption Paths (Continued)

30

TrafVu Graphic

31

Eastbound Travel (1 - Preempt in 22 min).

CUMULATIVE TRAVEL TIME (MIDDAY RUSH)
EASTBOUND ROUTE 26 (PROGRESS DRIVE TO MEIJER ENTRANCE) - THRU VEHICLES
> 1 PREEMPT(S) AT 60 SEC (PATH_ID - 101,1,2,3,4,111) < 180

160

140

120

TIME (SEC/VEH)

100

80

60

40

20

0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 7500 8000

LINEAR DISTANCE ALONG CORRIDOR (FT) SIGNAL EXISTING SMOOTH ADD_ONLY DWELL

32

Westbound Travel (1 - Preempt in 22 min.)

CUMULATIVE TRAVEL TIME (MIDDAY RUSH)
WESTBOUND ROUTE 26 (PROGRESS DRIVE TO MEIJER ENTRANCE) - THRU VEHICLES
> 1 PREEMPT(S) AT 60 SEC (PATH_ID - 101,1,2,3,4,111) < 180

160

140

120

TIME (SEC/VEH)

100

80

60

40

20

0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 7500 8000

LINEAR DISTANCE ALONG CORRIDOR (FT) SIGNAL EXISTING SMOOTH ADD_ONLY DWELL

33

Eastbound Travel (3 - Preempts in 22 min.)

CUMULATIVE TRAVEL TIME (MIDDAY RUSH)
EASTBOUND ROUTE 26 (PROGRESS DRIVE TO MEIJER ENTRANCE) - THRU VEHICLES
> 3 PREEMPT(S) AT 60 SEC, 150 SEC AND 700 SEC (PATH_ID - 101,1,2,3,4,111) < 180

160

140

120

TIME (SEC/VEH)

100

80

60

40

20

0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 7500 8000

LINEAR DISTANCE ALONG CORRIDOR (FT) SIGNAL EXISTING SMOOTH ADD_ONLY DWELL

34

Westbound Travel (3 - Preempts in 22 min.)

CUMULATIVE TRAVEL TIME (MIDDAY RUSH)
WESTBOUND ROUTE 26 (PROGRESS DRIVE TO MEIJER ENTRANCE) - THRU VEHICLES
> 3 PREEMPT(S) AT 60 SEC, 150 SEC AND 700 SEC (PATH_ID - 101,1,2,3,4,111) < 250

200

Dwell Transition

TIME (SEC/VEH)

150

100

50

0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 7500 8000

LINEAR DISTANCE ALONG CORRIDOR (FT) SIGNAL EXISTING SMOOTH ADD_ONLY DWELL

35

Side Street Delay (3 - Preempts in 22 min.)

SIDE STREET DELAY TIME (MIDDAY RUSH)
STATE ROUTE 26 (PROGRESS DRIVE TO MEIJER ENTRANCE) - ALL VEHICLES
> 3 PREEMPT(S) AT 60 SEC, 150 SEC AND 700 SEC (PATH_ID - 101,1,2,3,4,111) < 500 450 400 350

TIME (VEH-MIN / HR)

300 250 200 150 100

50 0 103,1 PROGRESS (NB) 102,1 PROGRESS (SB) 105,2 JCT I-65 (SB) 108,3 JCT I-65 (NB) 110,4 MEIJER (NB) 109,4 MEIJER (SB)

CORSIM LINK CODE (SEE NETWORK) EXISTING SMOOTH ADD_ONLY DWELL

36

Eastbound Stops (3 - Preempts in 22 min.)

NUMBER OF STOPS PER LINK (MIDDAY RUSH)
EASTBOUND ROUTE 26 (PROGRESS DRIVE TO MEIJER ENTRANCE) - THRU VEHICLES
> 3 PREEMPT(S) AT 60 SEC, 150 SEC AND 700 SEC (PATH_ID - 101,1,2,3,4,111) < 250

200

# OF STOPS

150

100

50

0 101,1 PROGRESS 1,2 JCT I-65 (SB) 2,3 JCT I-65 (NB) 3,4 MEIJER

CORSIM LINK CODE (SEE NETWORK) EXISTING SMOOTH ADD_ONLY DWELL

37

1 Preempt in 22 Minutes Statistically Significant?

Scenario / Path

MIDDAY PEAK Arterial direction that has a significant statistical difference in travel time with different margins. >0 >10 >15 >20 (s/v) (s/v) (s/v) (s/v)

AFTERNOON PEAK Arterial direction that has a significant statistical difference in travel time with different margins. >0 >10 >15 >20 (s/v) (s/v) (s/v) (s/v)
W B EB W B EB EB W B EB EB

1/1 1/2 1/3 1/4 1/5 1/6 1/7

W B

38

2 Preempt in 22 Minutes Statistically Significant?

Scenario / Path

MIDDAY PEAK Arterial direction that has a significant statistical difference in travel time with different margins. >0 >10 >15 >20 (s/v) (s/v) (s/v) (s/v)
W B EB W B EB EB W B EB W B EB

AFTERNOON PEAK Arterial direction that has a significant statistical difference in travel time with different margins. >10 >0 >15 >20 (s/v) (s/v) (s/v) (s/v)
W B EB W B EB EB W B EB W B EB W B EB EB EB EB EB EB

2/1 2/2 2/3 2/4 2/5 2/6 2/7

39

3 Preempt in 22 Minutes Statistically Significant?

Scenario / Path

MIDDAY PEAK Arterial direction that has a significant statistical difference in travel time with different margins. >0 >10 >15 >20 (s/v) (s/v) (s/v) (s/v)
W B EB W B W B EB EB W B EB W B EB W B

AFTERNOON PEAK Arterial direction that has a significant statistical difference in travel time with different margins. >10 >0 >15 >20 (s/v) (s/v) (s/v) (s/v)
EB EB EB EB EB W B W B W B W B W B W B W B EB EB EB W B EB EB EB EB EB EB EB EB EB EB

3/1 3/2 3/3 3/4 3/5 3/6 3/7

W B

40

Observations
Preemption does not have a major impact on under-saturated corridors. Dwell is the only transition algorithm that consistently performed badly. The stolen green timeis the main source of problems near saturation. There may be some advantage to using add-onlytransition near saturation.
41

Outline/ReCap
Discussed vendor neutralpreemption capabilities. Reviewed recently developed evaluation procedures - presented some case study results - upper bound on collateral impact of transit priority. Results are documented in 1999 ITSA Paper and Draft TRB 2000 Paper.
42

Questions

43