12. Governmenl Accession No.
`
`f 1. Report NO.
`FHW A-RD-94-141
`14. 11ue and SuDtllle
`TravTek SYSTEM ARCIDTECTURE EVALUATION
`
`7. Author(s)
`C. Blumentritt_i K. Balktt_ E. S~ou~ R. Sanchez
`9. Performing Organization Name and Address
`Texas Transportation Institute
`8150 North Central Expressway, Suite 815
`Dallas, Texas 75206
`
`12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
`Office of Safety and Traffic Operations R&D
`Federal Highway Administration, 6300 Georgetown Pike
`McLean, VA22101-2296
`
`15. Supplementary Notes
`
`Technical R~rt Documentation Page
`3. · Recrpienrs camrog No.
`
`5. Report Date
`
`5. -performing urganizauon -C-oae
`
`-s:: Pelforming urgamzation r<epon No.
`
`10. Work Unit No. (TRAJS)
`3B7A
`11. Contract or Grant No.
`DIFH61-9l-:C-OO106_
`13. Type of Report and Period Covered
`Final Report
`11/91 - 3/94
`-14. -Sponsonng Agency-Coae
`
`Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR) - Frank Mammano, HSR-12
`
`116. A6Stract
`The TravTek System Archjtecture Evaluation documents in detail the TravTek system,
`including the Traffic Information Network (TIN), TravTek Information Services Center (TISC),
`Traffic Management Center (TMC), and the TravTek vehicle. The TravTek system achieved a high
`state of automation. Link travel time data were received automatically from the probe vehicles,
`freeway management system, and arterial control management system. These data were fused and
`distributed to the vehicles, all without operator intervention. The process for estimating link travel
`times worked well on the basis of information available. TravTek needed more high quality traffic
`information to provide vehicle routing that had the benefit of accurate, up to minute traffic
`information. Probe vehicles provided reliable travel times, but reported significant travel time
`variations on arterial links due to stop time at intersections. Incident information available to
`TravTek was sparse and usually not timely. Historical link travel time, map, and local information
`data base accuracy was good. A human factors study, regarding the TMC operation and
`environment, found operator improvement was needed. The TravTek system was very reliable,
`largely due to a distributed architecture. Problems with the TravTek system were largely
`implementation related, as opposed to architecture related. Lessons learned during TravTek are
`enumerated, and conclusions are stated which sustain the overall success ofTravTek.
`
`17. KeyWords
`TravTek, ATIS, IVHS Architecture,
`Architecture Evaluation
`
`18. Distribution Statement
`No restrictions. This document is available to the
`public through the National Technical
`Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161
`
`19. Security Classif. {of this report)
`Unclassified
`
`20. Security Classif. (of this page)
`Unclassified
`
`21. No. of Pages
`250
`
`22. Price
`
`Form DOT F 1700.7
`
`(S..72)
`
`Reproduction of completed page authorized
`
`IPR2017-02022
`Unified EX1015 Page 1
`
`

`

`APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO Sf UNITS
`To Find
`When You Know MultlplyBy
`
`Symbol
`
`.Symbol
`
`Symbol
`
`APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS FROM SI UNITS
`To Find
`When You Know Multlply By
`
`Symbol
`
`In
`ft
`yd
`ml
`
`rn•
`ft'
`yd'
`ac
`mfl
`
`lnche•
`feet
`yard•
`mn•
`
`squarelnche1
`tquarefeet
`lcp.181'9 yard•
`acre•
`1cp.1nmhl
`
`mllmetn
`meter.a
`met1r1
`ldlometenl
`
`tqun mDRmellll"I mm'
`m•
`tqunmeterl
`m•
`aquaremeterl
`l'lectar•
`ha
`square kllometert
`km'
`
`mm
`m
`m
`tun
`
`mm'
`m•
`m•
`'ha
`km'
`
`ml
`L
`m'
`m'
`
`mlftmeterl
`meterl
`metm
`kllometerl
`
`1quent mDRmela!'I
`square met1r1
`1cp.1are metert
`hectarn
`1quare kHometll'I
`
`mRlifltel"I
`1181'1
`cublcmeterl
`cubic meterl
`
`l.Etft!TH
`0.039
`3.28
`1.09
`0.821
`AREA
`o.oous
`10.764
`1.195
`2 . .C7
`0.388
`VOLUME
`
`0.034
`0.264
`35.71
`1.307
`
`Inches
`feet
`yards
`mffet
`
`tquare lnchet
`aquare feet
`1quare yards
`acre&
`1quaremffe1
`
`lluldoun089
`gallon•
`cubic feet
`cubic yan:f1
`
`In
`ft
`yd
`ml
`
`in1
`~
`ycfl
`ac
`mi'
`
`II oz
`gal
`ft3
`ycfl
`
`mm
`m
`m
`tun
`
`ml
`L
`m'
`m'
`
`LE NOTH
`25.4
`0.305
`0.014
`1.81
`AREA
`845.2
`0.093
`0.838
`o . .cos
`2.&I
`VOLUME
`20.17
`lluld OWIC8I
`lloz
`mllllten
`3.785
`talon•
`pl
`1181"1
`0.021
`ft'
`cubic feet
`cubic metert
`0.715
`cubic yard•
`yd'
`cublcmeten
`NOTE: VolumM OJMtlf lhan 1000 I lhd be shown In m'.
`MASS
`21.35
`.o . .cs.c
`0.907
`
`oz
`lb
`T
`
`'"F
`
`le
`ti
`
`lbf
`lbflln'
`
`ounces
`pound•
`thort ton• (2000 lb)
`
`TEMPERATURE (exact)
`
`gram•
`kRogram1
`megagramt
`(ot •metric ton1
`
`"
`
`kg
`Mg
`(orT)
`
`0
`kg
`Mg
`(or ·n
`
`MASS
`0.035
`2.202
`1.103
`
`grams
`kHograrnt
`megagrama
`(or •metric ton")
`TEMPERATURE (exact)
`
`oz
`ouncet
`lb
`pounds
`short tons (2000 lb) T
`
`Fahrenheit
`temperature
`
`Celefut
`temperature
`
`l(F-32)19
`or (F-32)11.1
`ILLUMINATION
`10.78
`foot-cancle•
`lulC
`foot-Lamberti
`3.428
`candelalm1
`FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS
`•.45
`e.n
`
`pcundforce
`pcundfcrce per
`square Inch
`
`newton•
`kHopa1cal1
`
`"C
`
`"C
`
`Celelut
`lemperature
`
`UC +32
`
`Fahrenheit
`temperature
`
`ILLUMINATION
`
`llC
`cc:Vm•
`
`llC
`cc:Vm•
`
`luic
`foot-candles
`0.0929
`candelalm1
`foot-Lamberti
`0.2919
`FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS
`
`"F
`
`fc
`II
`
`N
`kPe
`
`N
`kPa
`
`newton•
`kRopa1c:al1
`
`0.225
`0.145
`
`pound force
`poundfcroe per
`square Inch
`
`lbf
`lbflln'
`
`(Revised September 1993)
`
`• SI 11 the symbol fer the lntemadonal System of Unitl. Appropriate
`rounding should bt mede to comply with Section 4 of ASTM E380.
`
`IPR2017-02022
`Unified EX1015 Page 2
`
`

`

`PREFACE
`
`TravTek was a joint public sector - private sector project to develop, test and evaluate an
`integrated driver information system and supporting infrastructure in metropolitan Orlando,
`Florida. TravTek provided motorists with navigation, real-time traffic information, route
`selection and guidance, and motorist information services. TravTek systems were installed in 100
`1992 Oldsmobile Toronados operating in a 1900 km2 area surrounding Orlando. Seventy-five of
`the cars were in a car rental fleet for use by visitors to Orlando and 25 of the cars were used by
`local residents and for special controlled tests.
`
`The project was the largest, most comprehensive advanced driver information system project
`to date attempted in the United States. It officially started on March 23, 1992 and operated for 1
`year. TravTek was a partnership between the private sector, represented by General Motors and
`the American Automobile Association, and the public sector, represented by the Federal Highway
`Administration, the Florida Department of Transportation, and the City of Orlando. Additional
`private sector participants included Motorola and A vis.
`
`The TravTek evaluation consisted of a series of connected research efforts that addressed
`every facet of the system. This effort was organized as a collection of major tasks. Task A was
`the Project Management task, and coordinated all efforts of the evaluation team, as well as
`provided liaison with the TravTek partners. Task B included the Rental User Study, to evaluate
`the drivers' impressions ofTravTek, and the Local User Study, to evaluate the participation of
`local users in longer term experiments. Task C included the Yoked Driver Study, to evaluate the
`relationship between use of the TravTek functions and measures of driver/vehicle performance,
`the Orlando Traffic Network study, to evaluate alternative TravTek/driver interface features, and
`the Camera Car Study, to examine driver interactions with different versions of the TravTek in(cid:173)
`vehicle system. Task D included the Debriefing and Interview Study, to gather qualitative
`information from participants, and the Questionnaire Study, to obtain user perceptions from a
`wider range of attributes. Task E included the TravTek Modeling Study, to model the traffic and
`safety performance of the TravTek system, and the Safety Study, to evaluate the safety of using
`in-vehicle information systems. Task F was the System Architecture Study, to evaluate all aspects
`of the TravTek system design.
`
`This report presents the results of the Task F System Architecture Evaluation. It documents
`in detail the TravTek system, including the Traffic Information Network (TIN), TravTek
`Information Services Center (TISC), Traffic Management Center (TMC), and the TravTek
`Vehicle. Each of these system entities has an overall description, and in tum each entity has a
`detailed functional description, a process description, and data flow diagrams. Issues addressed in
`the system architecture evaluation include: accuracy of the link travel times provided by the
`various real-time sources; accuracy and timeliness of the incident information broadcast to the
`TravTek vehicles; data base accuracy; performance of the data fusion process; system operation
`considerations: evaluation of operator interface, network covering, and degree of automation;
`reliability of subsystems, TMC/vehicle communications, and software; and system architecture
`features. The lessons learned during TravTek are given, and conclusions are stated which sustain
`the overall success ofTravTek.
`
`IPR2017-02022
`Unified EX1015 Page 3
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Section
`
`IN'TRODUCllON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
`TravTek BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
`I
`TravTek EVALUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
`TravTek ARCHITECTURE EVALUATION OBJECTIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
`SYSTEM OVERVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
`TRAFFIC INFORMATION NETWORK (TIN) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
`TravTek INFORMATION AND SERVICES CENTER (TISQ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
`TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT CENTER (TMQ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
`TravTek VEHICLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
`TELECOMMUNICATIONS ......................................... 16
`SYSTEM DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
`TRAFFIC INFORMATION NETWORK (TIN) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
`TIN Functional Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
`Link Travel Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
`Incident and Congestion Reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
`Information Dissemination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
`TravTek INFORMATION AND SERVICES CENTER (TISQ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
`TISC Functional Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
`. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
`TISC Process Description
`TISC Data Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
`TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT CENTER (TMQ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
`TMC Functional Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
`Traffic Information Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
`. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5
`Data Logging
`Traffic Data Fusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
`Traffic Information Dissemination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
`Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
`Operator Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
`TravTek VEHICLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
`. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
`TravTek Vehicle Functional Description
`Navigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
`Route Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
`Route Guidance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
`Local Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
`Driver Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
`Vehicle Probe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
`Data Logging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
`
`IPR2017-02022
`Unified EX1015 Page 4
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Section
`
`QUALITY OF TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
`QUALTIY OF TRAVEL TIME INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
`Evaluation Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
`Data Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
`Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
`System Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
`Source Errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
`QUALITY OF INCIDENT INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
`Evaluation Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
`Data Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
`Results...................................................... 98
`DATA BASE ACCURACY .......................................... 101
`Historical Data Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 I
`Map Data Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
`I 03
`Local Information Data Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
`EVALUATION OF THE DATA FUSION PROCESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
`DATA FUSION PROCESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
`Evaluation Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
`Data Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
`Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
`EVALUATION OF SYSTEM AND NE1WORK OPERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
`TMC OPERATOR INTERFACE ..................................... 119
`Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
`lnf ormation Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
`Job Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
`Workload Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
`Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
`Information Flow Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
`Job Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
`WorkloadAnalysis . ..................................... 126
`Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
`Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
`NE1WORK COVERING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
`Network Description
`. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
`Data Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
`Probe Vehicle Activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
`Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
`Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
`DEGREE OF AUTOMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
`Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
`
`IPR2017-02022
`Unified EX1015 Page 5
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Section
`
`SYSTEM RELIABarrv . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
`SUBSYSTEM RELIABarrY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
`Data Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
`Manual and Computer Generated Logs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
`Log Analysis ................................................. 149
`Onsite Interviews of Key TravTek Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
`Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
`Results: June 1 Through December 31, 1992 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
`Number of Failures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
`Duration of Failures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
`I 52
`. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
`Time ofDay Failures
`Results: January I Through March 31, 1993 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
`Number of F allures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
`Duration of Failures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
`Time ofDay Failures
`. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
`Results: June 1, 1992 Through March 31, 1993 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
`Number ofFailures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
`Duration of Failures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
`Time of Day Failures
`. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
`Onsite Interview Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
`Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
`TMC/VEfilCLE COMMUNICATION SUBSYSTEM RELIABarrY . . . . . . . 180
`Evaluation Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
`Data Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
`I 81
`Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
`SOFIW ARE RELIABaITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
`SYSTEM ARCfilTECTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
`TravTek DISTRIBUTED ARCHil'ECTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
`CENTRAL ARCmTECTURE DESIGN ALTERNATIVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
`RELATIONSHIP OF TravTek ARCHITECTURE TO PROBLEMS . . . . . . . . 199
`CRITIQUE OF IMPLEMENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
`COMMUNICATION SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
`IMPLEMENTATION CRITERIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
`LESSONS LEARNED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
`LIST OF LESSONS LEARNED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
`Lesson# 1: Truncated Test Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
`Lesson # 2: Diagnostic Information in Distributed System . . . . . . . . . . . 205
`Lesson # 3: Improve Degree of Automation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
`Lesson # 4: Map Data Bases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
`Lesson # 5: Dual Map Data Bases in Vehicle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
`Lesson # 6: Manual Record Keeping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
`
`IPR2017-02022
`Unified EX1015 Page 6
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Section
`
`LESSONS LEARNED (Continued)
`
`Lesson# 7: Quality of Travel Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
`Lesson # 8: TMC Manual Record Keeping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
`Lesson # 9: TIN Network Concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
`Lesson # 1 O: Traffic Data Timeliness .................... ·. . . . . . . . 207
`Lesson# 11: Public/Private Partnenhip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
`Lesson # 12: Development of Evaluation Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
`Lesson # 13: Timeliness and Quality of Incident Information . . . . . . . . 207
`Lesson# 14: Importance of Machine Logs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
`Lesson # 15: Involvment of Project Penonnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
`Lesson# 16: Performance of Distributed System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
`Lesson# 17: Operation of Complex System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
`Lesson # 18: Benefits of A TIS to Traffic Mangement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
`Lesson # 19: Acceptable Level of Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
`Lesson # 20: Timely Processing of Log Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
`SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER DATA EVALUATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
`CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
`APPENDIX A. TMC SYSTEM HARDWARE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
`APPENDIX B. TMC OPERATOR MENU FUNCTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
`APPENDIX C. DATA BASE OF TravTek AND FMC INCIDENTS
`(JANUARY 12, 1993 THROUGH MARCH 26, 1993) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
`APPENDIX D. PROBE VEIDCLE FREQUENCY BY MONTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
`REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
`
`IPR2017-02022
`Unified EX1015 Page 7
`
`

`

`Figure No.
`
`LIST OF FIGURES
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`5.
`6.
`7.
`8.
`9.
`10.
`11.
`12.
`13.
`14.
`15.
`16.
`17.
`18.
`19.
`20.
`21.
`22.
`23.
`24.
`25.
`26.
`27.
`28.
`29.
`30.
`31.
`32.
`33.
`34.
`35.
`36.
`3 7.
`3 8.
`39.
`40.
`
`. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
`TravTek geographic area
`TravTek system diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
`Traffic management center location.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
`Vehicle information flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
`Elements of traffic information network
`. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
`lliustration of travel time reporting function
`. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
`Data flow requirements for travel time reporting function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
`lliustration of moderate and heavy congestion levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
`Functional diagram of incident/congestion reporting task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
`Data flow requirements for reporting incidents and congestion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
`Functional diagram of information dissemination process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
`Data flow requirements for disseminating travel time and incident information. . . . . 26
`TISC system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
`TISC help desk information flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
`TMC computer configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
`TMC basic system configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
`Traffic information collection data flow diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
`TMC log data distribution path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
`Vehicle log data distribution path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
`TMC data fusion process data flow (all links updated each minute) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
`Traffic dissemination function data flow .................................. 43
`TMC/vehicle data radio system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
`TMC communications data flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
`TMC operator screen display (typical). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
`TMC operator menu selection diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
`TMC operator interaction process data flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
`TravTek vehicle architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
`Layout of the TravTek equipment in the vehicle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
`Interactions between TravTek vehicle functions
`. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
`Vehicle positioning function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
`Vehicle navigation data flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
`Vehicle route planning/route selection function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
`lliustration of route selection process for rerouting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
`Route selection data flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
`Route guidance functional diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
`Route guidance data flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
`Local information functional diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
`Local information data flow
`. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
`Driver interface function diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
`Data flow diagram for driverinterface function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
`
`IPR2017-02022
`Unified EX1015 Page 8
`
`

`

`Figure No.
`
`LIST OF FIGURES
`(Continued)
`
`41.
`42.
`43.
`44.
`45.
`46.
`47.
`48.
`49.
`SO.
`51.
`
`52.
`
`53.
`
`54.
`
`55.
`
`56.
`
`57.
`
`58.
`59.
`60.
`61.
`
`62.
`
`63.
`64.
`65.
`66.
`
`. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
`Vehicle probe function
`. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
`Probe report data flow
`Data logging function diagram
`. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
`In-vehicle data logging data flow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
`Distribution of winning travel time sources for instrumented arterial links . . . . . . . . 79
`Distribution of winning travel time sources for non-instrumented arterial links.. . . . 80
`Distribution of winning travel time sources on instrumented freeway links . . . . . . . . 81
`Distribution of winning travel time sources on non-instrumented freeway links ..... 82
`Relative error of sources of travel time information on freeway links . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
`Relative error of sources of travel time information on arterial links. . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
`Correlation between travel times estimated using speed information from
`freeway surveillance system and probe-measured travel times during AM
`peak periods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
`Correlation between travel times estimated using speed information from
`freeway surveillance system and probe-measured travel times during
`Off peak periods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
`Correlation between travel times estimated using speed information from
`freeway surveillance system and probe-measured travel times during PM
`peak periods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
`Correlation between travel times estimated using delay measurements from
`computerized traffic signal system (UTCS) and probe-measured travel times
`during AM peak periods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
`Correlation between travel times estimated using delay measurements from
`computerized traffic signal system (UTCS) and probe-measured travel times
`during Off peak periods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
`Correlation between travel times estimated using delay measurements from
`computerized traffic signal system (UTCS) and probe-measured travel times
`during PM peak periods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
`Type of incident information logged at the TravTek traffic management center
`(TMC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
`Versions of navigation map data bases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
`Versions of routing map data bases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
`Versions oflocal information data bases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
`Illustration of data fusion process on non-instrumented TravTek traffic
`network link . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
`Illustration of data fusion process on link covered by real-time surveillance
`system (UTCS or freeway surveillance system) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
`Relative error rates for each iteration of the data fusion process in the Off peak . . . 116
`Relative error rates for each iteration of the data fusion process in the AM peak . . 117
`Relative error rates for each iteration of the data fusion process in the PM peak . . 118
`Greater Orlando road map. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
`
`IPR2017-02022
`Unified EX1015 Page 9
`
`

`

`Figure No.
`
`LIST OF FIGURES
`(Continued)
`
`67.
`68.
`69.
`70.
`71.
`72.
`73.
`74.
`75.
`76.
`
`77.
`78.
`79.
`80.
`81.
`82.
`83.
`84.
`85.
`86.
`87.
`88.
`89.
`90.
`91.
`92.
`93.
`94.
`95.
`96.
`97.
`98.
`99.
`100.
`101.
`102.
`103.
`104.
`105.
`106.
`
`TravTek traffic link network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
`Number of links by roadway type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
`Link category distribution by distance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
`TravTek vehicle probe reports. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .