Division of Research
& Innovation
Report CA07- 0622
December 2008
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration Program
Summary Report
Final Report
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration Program Summary Report
Final Report
Report No. CA07- 0622
December 2008
Prepared By:
Kimley- Horn Associates, Inc.
Prepared For:
California Department of Transportation
Division of Research and Innovation, MS- 83
1227 O Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
DISCLAIMER STATEMENT
This document is disseminated in the interest of information exchange. The contents of this report
reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented
herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the State of California
or the Federal Highway Administration. This publication does not constitute a standard,
specification or regulation. This report does not constitute an endorsement by the Department of
any product described herein.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE
TR0003 ( REV. 10/ 98)
1. REPORT NUMBER
CA07- 0622
2. GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION NUMBER
N/ A
3. RECIPIENT’S CATALOG NUMBER
N/ A
5. REPORT DATE
January 2007
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration Program Summary Report
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
N/ A
7. Authors
Kimley- Horn Associates, Inc.
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
097317000
10. WORK UNIT NUMBER
N/ A
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
California Department of Transportation
Division of Research and Innovation, MS- 83
1227 O Street
Sacramento CA 95814
11. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER
65A0203
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Written; 6/ 15/ 2005- 12/ 18/ 2005
12. SPONSORING AGENCY AND ADDRESS
California Department of Transportation
Sacramento, CA 95819
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
N/ A
15. SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES
Each evaluation contains a full report on the observations and analyses for each of the demonstrations.
16. ABSTRACT
The purpose of this contract is to conduct a technical performance analysis and operational evaluation of ITS projects
demonstrated at the Innovative Mobility Experience Showcase in conjunction with the 2005 ITS World Congress. Some
of these projects were demonstrated primarily as pilot projects for the California's Innovative Corridors Initiative ( ICI).
Partners who are respondents to the CFS have agreed to participate in a comprehensive evaluation of their respective
projects to be conducted by the contractor of Caltrans choice.
Through the ICI demonstration projects, Caltrans and the San Francisco Bay Area MTC worked successfully
with private- sector technology companies to deploy and demonstrate innovative technologies for ITS in
California.
Seven separate demonstration projects were evaluated that could enhance data collection, data processing, and
data dissemination. As detailed in the final report, these evaluations summarized the technical results of findings,
and presented a table of pros and cons in the recommendations that may be helpful to decision- makers in
moving forward with the particular product or technology.
The objective was not to approve or reject any of these products or system but to identify the pro and cons of
each but to identify the pros and cons of each in terms of the questions raised in Section 1.2 of the Project
Objectives of the final report: whether the product function as purported by the Vendor; and if the data accurate
and useable.
17. KEY WORDS
ITS Technology; Pilot Projects; Innovative
Corridors Initiative ( ICI)
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
No restrictions. This document is available to the
public through the National Technical Information
Service, Springfield, VA 22161
19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION ( of this report)
Unclassified
20. NUMBER OF PAGES
202
21. PRICE
$ 249,752.00
Reproduction of completed page authorized
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration
Program Summary Report
Prepared For
Caltrans
January 2007
FINAL
Prepared By
Kimley- Horn and
Associates
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration| Program Summary Report
January 2007- FINAL
Page i
ITS Pilot Project Evaluation
PROGRAM SUMMARY REPORT.................................................................................. 1
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Project Origination.................................................................................................................... .......... 1
1.2 Project Objective...................................................................................................................... ........... 1
1.3 Evaluation Approach....................................................................................................................... .. 2
2. Project Participants ..................................................................................................... 3
2.1 TeleAtlas TV511.......................................................................................................................... ........ 3
2.2 ENCOM Wireless....................................................................................................................... ......... 4
2.3 Circumnav Networks ( now Dash Navigation)........................................................................... 4
2.4 Infotek........................................................................................................................ .............................. 4
2.5 NAVTEQ – 511 Level Two............................................................................................................... 5
2.6 NAVTEC – Vehicle Infrastructure Cooperation ( VIC) ........................................................... 5
2.7 Outreach – Probe Vehicle Technology....................................................................................... 5
3. Summary of Evaluation Findings................................................................................. 6
4. Lessons Learned....................................................................................................... 12
5. Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 15
APPENDIX A: EVALUATION REPORTS
Consultant Contact Information:
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc.
Randy Durrenberger
510.625.0712
randy. durrenberger@ kimley- horn. com
P:\ 097317000 - Caltrans Pilot Project Demonstration - RRD\ Program Summary Report\ FINAL\ Program Summary Report- FINAL. doc
Program Summary Report
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration | Program Summary Report
January 2007- FINAL
Page 1
Program Summary Report
1. Introduction
This report summarizes the results of the technical evaluation of Innovative Corridors
Initiative ( ICI) demonstration projects in California deployed by the California
Department of Transportation ( Caltrans) and the San Francisco Bay Area Metropolitan
Transportation Commission ( MTC).
1.1 Project Origination
Caltrans and its regional partners are interested in deploying ITS technologies and
services in conjunction with industry representatives. ICI was a program designed to
encourage the early deployment of innovative technologies for ITS in California.
Through ICI, Caltrans and its regional partners issued a Call for Submissions ( CFS)
inviting technology representatives to submit proposals to deploy ITS technology in a
demonstration setting to share data and information collected with the public sector in
return for access to the Caltrans right- of- way and data not normally granted to the private
sector. These technology representatives were required to self- fund the pilot
demonstrations through an agreed- upon duration. In exchange, they were able to test their
products and services in a real- world setting, showcase them at the 2005 ITS World
Congress in San Francisco, California, and be evaluated by an independent observer. The
CFS resulted in 28 proposals from 16 private companies that could enhance data
collection, data processing, and data dissemination. Ultimately, seven companies
representing eight projects were selected to enter into a contractual agreement with
Caltrans to conduct demonstrations.
1.2 Project Objective
The objective of the evaluation project is to assess the technical feasibility and
functionality of the demonstration technologies as they pertain to safety, efficiency,
reliability, accuracy, mobility, cost- effectiveness, system management and integration.
The ICI demonstration projects evaluated are related to data collection, transmission,
processing, or dissemination. The project and supporting vendor are listed below:
1) TV511 – Tele Atlas
2) Wireless Data Solutions – ENCOM
3) Dynamic Route Advisory System – Circumnav Networks ( now Dash
Technologies)
4) Intelligent Loop Detector – Infotek Associates
5) 511 Level Two– NAVTEQ
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration | Program Summary Report
January 2007- FINAL
Page 2
6) Vehicle Infrastructure Cooperation ( VIC) – NAVTEQ
7) Bay Area Web Congestion Mapping and Traffic Forecasting – Outreach
8) Speed Sensor Demonstration – SpeedInfo
The eight projects above were also deployed together as a working system. The data
flow between the projects and the public agencies involved is shown in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1: Data Flows
Each ICI demonstration project is unique and each evaluation required a customized
evaluation criteria that focuses on aspects of hardware, software, and end users. The
evaluation for these projects sought to answer the following questions:
· Does the product function as purported by the Vendor in the CFS responses?
· Is the data accurate and reliable?
1.3 Evaluation Approach
A standard evaluation approach and format was developed for program consistency and
to facilitate comparisons between various projects. Each report is divided into an
Evaluation Summary and an Evaluation Details section. The Evaluation Summary
section includes the main points and results of the Evaluation Details section. The
format of the Evaluation Details section was standardized as follows:
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration | Program Summary Report
January 2007- FINAL
Page 3
1. Delivery— This section includes vendor’s stated objective as well as
additional assertions and long- term goals in the Caltrans contract.
2. Project Specifics— This section includes the locations, dates, and times of the
deployment and evaluation.
3. Technology— This section includes a description of the technology or system
being evaluated as well as the results of previous deployments.
4. Performance Measures— The results of each evaluation included
Quantitative Outputs, Qualitative Outputs, and Other Performance Factors.
The information was mostly presented in response to specific questions. The
project performance measures for each individual project were also related to
Caltrans’ 9 performance measures, indicating Caltrans’ ones were applicable.
5. Evaluation Methodology— This section summarizes the evaluation
methodology process.
6. Evaluation Results— This section includes the results from the data gathering
and data analysis.
7. Recommendation to Caltrans— A table of pros and cons was used to
summarized the information gathered by the evaluation.
Each evaluation included a review of the 9 Caltrans Performance Measures, simply
indicating which Caltrans measures were applicable.
For projects that were primarily data collection, the performance evaluation was based on
accuracy. For other projects that represent system demonstrations, the performance
evaluation was based on technology and system integration, ease of use, and benefits to
agencies or end users. The specific elements that were evaluated for each demonstration
project are described in further detail below.
2. Project Participants
This section briefly introduces each product and technical features that are being
demonstrated.
2.1 TeleAtlas TV511
TeleAtlas developed a sequence of traffic images and information called TV511 that
provides continuous real- time traffic and incident data for Bay Area freeways. This
information plans to include real- time traffic, transit, road conditions, and road- weather
information based on information from 511 and CHP. The program was developed in
coordination with KMTP TV32 with an intended air time from 5 AM to 8 AM weekdays.
The program combines incidents displayed on local maps with voice and on- screen text.
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration | Program Summary Report
January 2007- FINAL
Page 4
2.2 ENCOM Wireless
ENCOM wireless data modems provide wireless communications between traffic
monitoring and control systems as a substitute to hardwire communications. ENCOM
products use license free, frequency hopping spread spectrum ( FHSS) technology.
ENCOM’s 2000 series modems are designed to collect and transfer multiple contact
closure information from any remote detection or monitoring system such as a Ramp
Metering System ( RMS) to a master controller. The technology allows multiple
transmitters to communicate to a single receiver allowing a single Transportation
Management System ( TMS)/ RMS controller to serve multiple detection locations. The
objective of this technology as stated by the vendor is to provide a cost- effective
alternative to lengthy cables between detector stations, provide easier and less disruptive
deployment as compared to hardwire communication, maximize the deployment location
flexibility, and reduce the cost of equipment at multiple detections locations.
2.3 Circumnav Networks ( now Dash Navigation)
Circumnav Networks, Inc. ( now Dash Navigation) developed a technology that allows
two- way communication of traffic data between vehicles and roadside devices. The
system is designed so that probe data that includes speed and direction of travel can be
sent from the vehicle to a fixed roadside access point ( roadside unit). The roadside unit
sends real- time traffic conditions back to the vehicle. Additionally, vehicle- to- vehicle
communications are also possible using Wi- Fi technology and software. The probe data
gathered by the vehicles is combined with speed data from 511 services to create a
comprehensive database of real- time speed data. The data is sent to the vehicles and
utilized by a navigation device to display real- time route guidance and estimated travel
times. Communication between each roadside access point and the Circumnav servers is
achieved through cellular technologies. For the ITS World Congress demonstration,
Circumnav installed several fixed access points along Bay Area highways.
2.4 Infotek
The Intelligent Loop Detector processes raw loop detector data from the field and then
sends post- processed information wirelessly to a Transportation Management Center
( TMC). This is a potentially economical solution versus using a traffic signal controller
to collect, process, and transmit data. The post- processed information will be small
compared to the raw loop data and therefore much easier and faster to transmit over a
wireless network. Post- processed information includes spot speeds and number of long
vehicles ( based on volume and occupancy data).
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration | Program Summary Report
January 2007- FINAL
Page 5
2.5 NAVTEQ – 511 Level Two
The 511 Level Two application is an enhancement to the existing Bay Area 511 traveler
information system which offers personalized services based on individual user needs,
and leverages NAVTEQ’s digital map coverage. The application consists of a voice
recognition interface; customized personal identification number ( PIN) capability which
allows user to “ store” directions and access them at another time; door- to- door driving
directions for the entire Bay Area; the ability to select address or point of interest ( POI)
as origin and destination; the ability to determine parking garage space availability; and
make parking reservations in real- time.
2.6 NAVTEC – Vehicle Infrastructure Cooperation ( VIC)
The Vehicle Infrastructure Cooperation deployment is a physical Proof of Concept
demonstration of vehicle- to- roadside communication concepts. The VIC deployment
demonstrates various Vehicle Infrastructure Integration ( VII) concepts such as
centralized data processing and disseminating capability, common location referencing,
and physical infrastructure deployment. The deployment consists of the following three
main elements: the VII Data Processing Center - a central shared repository for probe
vehicle data; the Map Display application and Common Location Referencing which
allowes NAVTEQ and the partners to provide standardized location references and
display real- time incident information; and the actual infrastructure consisting of 12
roadside units ( RSUs) throughout San Francisco city streets.
2.7 Outreach – Probe Vehicle Technology
Outreach, a non- profit paratransit service, designed a website that aggregates speed data
from several sources and displays both real- time and forecasted roadway speeds. Existing
data sources include fixed roadway sensors, traffic incidents, and private fleet data.
Additional speed data is acquired from volunteer drivers who download Outreach
software onto their Personal Digital Assistant ( PDA) with Bluetooth Global Positioning
System ( GPS) capability. The PDAs, with Bluetooth GPS and the Outreach software, are
capable of measuring a vehicle’s speed, determining its location, and then sending that
information back to the Outreach server. All of the information is collected by a “ virtual
loop detector” to hold real- time and historical speed data for major highways, major
arterials, and streets. The data archive is used to forecast roadway speeds for each
segment. The Outreach approach is similar to 511’ s approach in aggregating information
from Caltrans loop detectors and California Highway Patrol Computer- Aided Dispatch
( CHP CAD) for display to the public. Outreach also proposes to add new sources of
probe data such as transit fleets, commercial fleets, and volunteer drivers.
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration | Program Summary Report
January 2007- FINAL
Page 6
2.8 SpeedInfo
SpeedInfo uses Doppler radar technology to obtain speed data. Data is collected using
sensors mounted on existing poles within Caltrans right- of- way on the side of the
freeway. The data is transmitted to a central server via a cellular network. SpeedInfo
reviews the accuracy of the data and formats it for delivery to their partners. The data is
merged with publicly available traffic data in order to process the data and format it for
the end user. In the context of this pilot project, Nearly 300 SpeedInfo sensors were
installed at locations where Caltrans loops do not exist in the Bay area. Sensors have also
been installed at a few locations where Caltrans loops are present. A sample from the
overlapping locations was used in the evaluation.
3. Summary of Evaluation Findings
Each evaluation contains a full report on the observations and analyses for each of the
demonstrations. The objective of the evaluation was not to approve or reject any of these
products or systems; rather, it is to identify the pros and cons of each in terms of the
questions raised in Section 1.2 Project Objectives of this report: whether the product
function as purported by the Vendor; and if the data accurate and useable.
The full FINAL reports of each evaluation are included as Appendix A. The focus of the
evaluation findings are summarized below as well as the pros and cons in the
recommendations to Caltrans that may be helpful to decision- makers in moving forward
with the particular product or technology.
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration | Program Summary Report
January 2007- FINAL
Page 7
TV511 Demonstration – TeleAtlas
The TV511 evaluation focused on the benefit that the program provides for traffic
information dissemination and the reliability of the information. Factors included the
delay in incident posting, ease of relevant data recognition, and the accuracy and breadth
of data. The reliability of the system considered the chance of failure or inconsistency
between 511 data and TV511 data.
PROS CONS
Provides enhanced incident information
without the use of computer/ internet access
Requires sponsorship for broadcast
Displays incident information effectively with
coordinated voice and text displays
Does not include transit, travel time, speed data, or
slowdown incidents
Information is nearly identical to what is posted
on 511. org and SFgate. com
Cannot provide user- customized information like the
511. org website and phone service
Quickly cycles through all Bay Area incidents
( every 3- 5 minutes)
Viewer required to watch non- relevant information to
obtain desired information
Updates incident information as it is received Some delay incurred in displaying a percentage of
incidents
Wireless Data Solutions – ENCOM
ENCOM demonstrated the replacement of hardwire communications between a
telephone demarcation cabinets and a Model 170 controllers and between two Model 170
controllers. The following three locations were included in the evaluation:
· Valley Blvd On Ramp at I- 10 EB, City of El Monte, California
· Baldwin Ave On Ramp at I- 10 EB, City of El Monte, California
· Madre St Ramps at I- 210 EB, City of Pasadena, California
The quantitative results compared the controller communications rates with the hardwire
connection in place and with wireless connection in place, while the qualitative results
included a discussion of factors that would affect the wireless communications rate and
additional maintenance considerations.
PROS CONS
Does not require trenching or directional
drilling for installation of conduit; avoids traffic
disruption due to conduit installation
Requires near line of sight between antennas free of
obstructions due to buildings and vegetation.
May be less expensive in situations where
conduit installation is expensive or difficult to
install.
Additional ongoing troubleshooting/ equipment
configuration may be required over hardwire
connections.
Can be installed more quickly than when
conduit installation is required; useful as a
temporary solution when hardwire
communication cables are broken or are
Increased maintenance to trim vegetation could be
needed to maintain line of sight.
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration | Program Summary Report
January 2007- FINAL
Page 8
removed during construction.
Uses RS232 and FSK protocols commonly
used by traffic controllers.
Line of sight could be blocked by future buildings.
Utilizes license- free, low- power frequencies for
communications.
Antennas might attract unwanted attention to
cabinets; issues related to damage and theft of
equipment might arise.
Can handle point- to- point and point- to-multipoint
configurations.
Drilling holes in the cabinet walls could be required
for antenna cables; these holes are additional
location for dirt, dust and moisture to enter cabinet.
If ENCOM equipment is relocated to another
location, these holes would need to be sealed.
Dynamic Route Advisory System – Circumnav ( Dash Technologies)
This evaluation focused on the accuracy and reliability of the two- way data
communications between the vehicle and the roadside unit. The evaluation also
considered vehicle to vehicle data transfer. The data collection focused on observing the
installation and maintenance of the equipment and on the data transfer between the
vehicle and the roadside unit. Installation and maintenance results were based on field
visits to typical roadside units and observation/ examination of the vehicle equipment.
Results regarding the range and speed of the data transfer were provided by the vendor.
PROS CONS
Allows in- vehicle visual access to real- time
traffic data
It requires a large number of probe vehicles and
roadside devices to obtain valid data
Collects traffic data from probe vehicles,
including information on major arterials
Recurring cellular connection costs to roadside
units
Allows for map and yellow pages updates
without user involvement
There may be a capacity limit of how many
vehicles can communicate with each other and a
single roadside device .
Allows data to be transmitted between passing
cars and between vehicles and roadside
devices
Topography, roadway curvature and speed
differential may impact the communications
performance shown in the trial data.
Can determine and distribute arterial roadway
traffic conditions
Limited evaluation data available for vehicle- to-roadside
communications.
Wi- Fi connections allow vehicle- to- roadside
and vehicle- to- vehicle communication allows
sharing of traffic information without incurring
cellular data costs.
Currently the road side units are installed with call
boxes. While call boxes are phasing out, feasible
location for road side units may be difficult to
determine.
New road construction and improvements
information can be automatically determined
and distributed by system
Minimal installation cost and impact to existing
roadway equipment.
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration | Program Summary Report
January 2007- FINAL
Page 9
Intelligent Loop Detector – Infotek
This evaluation focused on the feasibility and accuracy of processing loop data in the
field rather than at the TMC. There were two deployment locations for Infotek in the
context of this pilot project: Three locations were in Caltrans District 4 ( San Francisco
Bay Area) that focused on Volume, Speed, and Occupancy information using loops in
dual- loop configuration, and three locations were in Caltrans District 7 ( Los Angeles and
Ventura County) that focused on detection of long vehicles using loops in single- loop
configuration. The evaluation process compared post- processed Infotek information
( volume, speed, occupancy, truck counts) with one or more of the following:
· Output from Traffic Management Center after processing raw data;
· Output from Caltrans Performance Monitoring System ( PeMS) records;
· Manual counts ( from video tape)
fv
PROS CONS
Total daily volume data closely matches manual
counts.
Requires field calibration of Caltrans detector
cards at each deployment location.
Can provide vehicle classification ( length data)
from single- loop and dual- loop detector
configurations.
Accuracy of results may vary based on variance
in volume or speed.
Provides cellular communications link to field
controllers. Useful for items like cabinet and
detector rack remote reset.
Recurring cellular communications costs.
Includes loop diagnostic tools
May be less expensive than 170/ 2070 controller
Device is programmable and format of data can
be easily changed based on user needs.
511 Level Two– NAVTEQ
The parking space availability and parking space reservation elements were not deployed
in this demonstration. The evaluation for the other elements of the NAVTEQ 511 Level
Two system considered the following three key elements:
· Data Accuracy ( accuracy of directions or parking availability information,
voice recognition, and dropped calls)
· Integration with existing Bay Area 511
· User Satisfaction and Usability ( user’s ability to navigate through the 511
Level Two system; possible delay caused by an abundance of POI choices,
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration | Program Summary Report
January 2007- FINAL
Page 10
granularity of directions, complexity of system, ability to save preset routes
for personalized service).
These items were assessed by making sample requests using the 511 Level Two services
by telephone. System failures such as hang- ups or system down time were noted to
quantify system reliability.
PROS CONS
Covers route information for entire country Difficult to interpret and utilize some of the
directions provided due to occasionally
inaccurate traveling distance and cardinal
directions
Directions provided similar to those available
through commercial websites such as
maps. yahoo. com and mapquest. com
Sometimes difficult to communicate with
computerized voice system
Saves last direction request and allows access to
the same direction
Menu navigation could use improvement so that
the users would not spend long time to locate
the information they need
Numerous points of interest Accepts non- existent addresses
Low disconnection rate Does not yet incorporate real- time traffic data in
traveling directions, while main 511 system has
real- time data capability
Smallest increment of ¼ mile can misguide user
Vehicle- Infrastructure Cooperation ( VIC) – NAVTEQ
The demonstration project was not deployed and could not be evaluated.
Bay Area Web Congestion Mapping and Traffic Forecasting – Outreach
While the Outreach system was the original focus of this evaluation, Outreach was not
able to continue the demonstration after the 2005 ITS World Congress due to a loss of
financial commitment. As a result, the evaluation was revised to include a review of the
Outreach System report and research into the planned deployment of cellular phone-based
and PDA/ GPS- based probe vehicle technologies around the country. In addition
to the Outreach system, information was gathered on planned deployments in the
following locations:
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration | Program Summary Report
January 2007- FINAL
Page 11
· Atlanta, Georgia ( cellular phone- based)
· Baltimore, Maryland ( cellular phone- based, GPS- based on fleet vehicles)
· Missouri ( cellular phone- based)
· Portland, Oregon ( GPS- based on transit vehicles)
The evaluation included interviews with public agencies that are currently using or might
use such information in their deployments of real- time information to determine what
steps would be needed to integrate this information and identify any obstacles by using
such information. Due to the fact that probe vehicle technology is still largely an
emerging technology, there is very little tangible data that is available.
PROS CONS
Traffic probes present the opportunity for another
source of traffic data.
Algorithms for correlating probe data to roadway
speeds and travel times still under development.
Less calculation required to determine travel
time of an individual vehicle for a segment.
Dependent on sufficient volume of probe
vehicles to produce accurate and reliable data.
Installation of equipment is less disruptive and
less expensive than installation of loop detectors
or other point- based vehicle detection devices.
Public will have privacy concerns about probe
technologies.
Relies on existing cellular networks and/ or GPS
so can be deployed to cover a larger area
quickly.
Privacy concerns may limit the willingness of
cellular phone providers to be associated with
cellular- phone- based tracking.
System could cover arterial streets network
which is typically not monitored by traditional
traffic monitoring technologies.
Currently, GPS- based devices are not common
among drivers.
Cellular phones are common among motorists.
GPS- based devices ( including new cellular
phones) are becoming common.
Lack of standards or protocols for data exchange
increase costs for agency to switch to new probe
vehicle provider.
Opportunity for private/ public partnership.
Speed Sensor – SpeedInfo
This evaluation focused on accuracy of data collected from roadside sensors in
comparison to other data collection sources. Data from the following two locations was
included in the evaluation.
· I- 80 E between Gilman Street and Golden Gate Fields & I- 80 E between
Golden Gate Fields and Central Avenue
· I- 80 W between Golden Gate Fields and Gilman Street
The SpeedInfo data was compared to other data ( i. e., Caltrans loop data, GPS “ floating
car” run data) to measure accuracy, reliability, and productivity. A portion of the
evaluation also looked at the reliability of data disseminated on the SpeedInfo website
( www. speedinfo. com). Other areas of evaluation included integration compatibility with
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration | Program Summary Report
January 2007- FINAL
Page 12
existing data sources, costs for installation and maintenance, and scalability of the
system.
PROS CONS
Provides ability to access data at locations
without data infrastructure in place.
Relies on cellular networks so the performance
relies on an outside service
Low power requirements and runs on solar
power.
Crystal device failure cannot be predicted but
may have been resolved.
Ease of installation and configuration into an
existing system.
Currently provides only an average speed per
sample size.
Uses proven Doppler technology.
Easy data access for public via website.
4. Lessons Learned
This demonstration project is the first of its type conducted by Caltrans. As a result, there
were numerous lessons learned in the process of completing the project. These are
presented below, along with some ideas for adjustments that may help to address these
issues on future projects. These ideas may or may not be feasible depending on the
particular conditions and details for a future project.
1. There is little incentive for vendor action without compensation or recognition.
The vendors that responded and were selected to participate in this ICI program
were not compensated for their labor or equipment in this demonstration, and the
primary recognition for this project was from the ITS World Congress event. As
a result, it was difficult at times to observe progress in the demonstration and the
schedule would often be delayed. Further, several vendors discontinued their
demonstration efforts due to a lack of funding support toward the demonstration.
This all became particularly evident after the conclusion of the ITS World
Congress with no future event for showcasing the product or technology.
Ideas for Improvement:
· Include financial compensation in contract.
· Schedule evaluation to be completed before or shortly after a showcase event.
· Require vendor to give more advance notice of major changes in or
cancellation of deployment plan.
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration | Program Summary Report
January 2007- FINAL
Page 13
2. Starting project close to major showcase event reduced the vendor resources
available for the evaluation.
The project kick- off meeting was held in September 2005 when vendors were also
busy preparing for the ITS World Congress showcase event in early November
2005. The importance and marketing opportunity of the ITS World Congress
resulted in vendors focusing their time and/ or resources toward the ITS World
Congress set- up rather than the evaluation project.
Ideas for Improvement:
· Start working with vendors well before a showcase event.
· Consultant and/ or Caltrans to visit and/ or observe the vendor staff or group
responsible for demonstration project to understand vendor processes and
available data.
3. Vendor staff changed through the course of the project.
For some of the demonstration projects, there were changes the Vendor project
staff that introduced some confusion or delayed response as the new staff became
acquainted with the project and recent decisions.
Ideas for Improvement:
· Include two vendor contacts for each project.
· Provide clear and regular documentation of expectations and action items of
all project participants ( vendor, Caltrans, consultant, etc.)
4. There were changes in vendor deployments.
Since the project is primarily driven by the Vendor’s interests, there were
occasions where a vendor decided not to move forward with the demonstration or
abandoned a particular technology that was part of the demonstration for a newer
technology. This affected the approach that was taken in the evaluation. In these
instances, KHA worked with the stakeholders to determine what information was
available from the vendor and whether the evaluation should be continued. For
the evaluations that were continued, the scope was modified to fit the available
data. In one case, the evaluation was expanded to look at other deployments of
probe vehicle deployments outside of California.
Ideas for Improvement:
· Clarify expectations up- front of what would be expected from vendor and
consultant in case of a changed deployment plan.
· Require vendor to give more advance notice of major changes in or
cancellation of deployment plan.
· Stakeholders and Consultant to conference quickly after change in
deployment plan.
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration | Program Summary Report
January 2007- FINAL
Page 14
5. Obtaining and confirming a reliable independent data source was difficult.
Some demonstrations produced data whose accuracy needed to be evaluated. The
evaluation approach relied on using existing data sources or data that could easily
be collected. However, such data was not always available, it was difficult to
confirm the available data’s accuracy, or the data did not quite match the vendor
data ( e. g. different format, location, timing, etc.). Without reliable baseline data,
it is very difficult to confidently evaluate the accuracy of vendor data. In one of
the cases, there might have been an opportunity to install the demonstration
equipment in closer proximity to another independent data source ( loop detector
station) in order to improve the confidence level of the comparison if this data
source was identified prior to the installation.
Ideas for Improvement:
· Ask vendor for suggestions of existing independent data sources prior to
installation of project demonstration equipment.
· Obtain buy- in from vendor of evaluation baseline data prior to starting the
evaluation process.
· Document the data format that is being expected from the Vendor prior to
start of evaluation.
· Consultant and/ or Caltrans to visit and/ or observe the vendor staff or group
responsible for demonstration project to understand vendor processes and
available data.
· Increase budget to allow for additional new data collection.
6. Vendor expressed concerns over evaluation methodology after evaluation had
been completed.
For some demonstrations, the vendors expressed concerns about the evaluation
methodology after seeing the DRAFT evaluation report, although they had been
given the opportunity to review the evaluation plan. When schedule and budget
allowed, these concerns were addressed in the FINAL evaluation report.
Ideas for Improvement:
· Provide a one- page summary of the evaluation specifics ( in addition to the
evaluation plan) for Caltrans and Vendor to review prior to beginning
evaluation.
· Obtain buy- in from vendor of evaluation baseline data prior to starting the
evaluation process.
· Consultant and/ or Caltrans to visit and/ or observe the vendor staff or group
responsible for demonstration project to understand vendor processes and
available data.
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration | Program Summary Report
January 2007- FINAL
Page 15
5. Conclusion
Through the Innovative Corridors Initiative ( ICI) demonstration projects, the California
Department of Transportation ( Caltrans) and the San Francisco Bay Area Metropolitan
Transportation Commission ( MTC) worked successfully with private- sector technology
companies to deploy and demonstrate innovative technologies for ITS in California.
Seven separate demonstration projects were evaluated that could enhance data collection,
data processing, and data dissemination. These evaluations summarized the technical
results of findings, and presented a table of pros and cons in the recommendations that
may be helpful to decision- makers in moving forward with the particular product or
technology.
This demonstration project is the first of its type conducted by Caltrans, and there were
numerous lessons learned in the process of completing the project. These lessons and the
ideas for improvement will be helpful in the scoping and management of future similar
projects.
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration Program Summary Report
APPENDIX A: EVALUATION REPORTS
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration
TV511
Evaluation
Prepared for
Caltrans
June 2006
FINAL
Prepared By
Kimley- Horn and
Associates
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | TV511
June 2006
Page i
ITS Pilot Project Evaluation
EVALUATION SUMMARY........................................................................................... 1
EVALUATION DETAILS ............................................................................................. 4
1. Delivery ................................................................................................................... 4
2. Project Specifics...................................................................................................... 4
3. Technology.............................................................................................................. 5
3.1 Technology or System Description.................................................................................................... 5
3.2 Previous Evaluations ( including vendor’s own) and/ or Similar Technology Deployments............. 5
4. Performance Measures ........................................................................................... 5
4.1 Quantitative Outputs........................................................................................................................ .. 6
4.2 Qualitative Outputs ............................................................................................................................. 8
4.3 Performance Factors........................................................................................................................ . 9
5. Evaluation Methodology ........................................................................................ 11
6. Evaluation Results................................................................................................. 12
7. Recommendation to Caltrans ................................................................................ 15
Vendor Contact Information:
TV511
Larry Sweeney
650.328.3825
http:// www. na. teleatlas. com
TV511
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | TV511
May 2006
Page 1
Evaluation Summary
Vendor/ Project – Tele Atlas North America, Inc./ TV511 Demonstration
TeleAtlas and KMTP jointly produced and broadcast real- time traffic and transit
information on over- the- air and cable TV. The TV511 program combines computer-generated
voice and on- screen text with maps indicating the locations and types of
traffic incidents. There are five different coverage maps – one overview and four
detailed – covering the Bay Area. The program continuously cycles with updated
information.
Delivery: Does demonstration satisfy Vendor’s stated objectives for Caltrans?
Vendor’s stated objectives:
· Provide real- time transit and traffic data via broadcast television
· Allow viewers to obtain relevant information within 2- 4 minutes of turning on the
program
TV511 was broadcast on KMTP during 2005 ITS World Congress ( November
2005) for a period of six days. After that period, KMTP discontinued the
broadcast in favor of more popular programming. TeleAtlas provided an XML
feed to Kimley- Horn that allowed viewing of the TV511 loop via the internet.
Real- time traffic incident data is included in the provided TV511 feed. No
transit information is included in the service.
Key Observations
· Capabilities of Technology
o The technology is very sound and effective at informing the viewer
of traffic incidents in the Bay Area via television. Nearly all
observed incidents observed at 511. org or SFgate. com websites
were included in the TV511 feed with minimal delay. The voice
matched the text for all but one observed incident ( 71 observations)
even with a wide variety of incident descriptions.
o Certain types of traffic alerts, displayed on both 511. org and
SFgate. com, were not displayed by TV511 at any point during the
program. Missed information included Caltrans construction
projects, a major event alert, and severe traffic alert/ emergency road
closures. During each of the three peak periods evaluated, two
long- term construction- related road closures were not included. In
addition, an event at the Cow Palace and two severe traffic
alerts/ road closures were not displayed by the system.
o There are several missing features offered in the original contract
that should be added to provide additional benefit to the viewer,
such as speed information and transit information. According to
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | TV511
June 2006
Page 2
TeleAtlas, the program could be improved relatively easily to include
these additional features.
o It would be beneficial for the service to allow bulletins to be posted
remotely by 511 staff, which would require some day- to- day effort by
511 staff to enter the messages. This would require minor changes
to the software program. However, if these messages are sent
directly to the TV511 server, they would not be included in the 511
database since the communications between the 511 database and
the TV511 Server are one- way only.
· Ease of setup/ maintenance
o The system is simple to initialize and operate. A computer at the
broadcast station with an internet connection to the TV511 server is
required. TeleAtlas provides an installation CD for placing the
TV511 program on the computer and configuring the connection to
the TV511 server. Installing the program takes approximately 20
minutes after which the output for the computer is ready for display
on a computer monitor or to be broadcast.
o Day- to- day maintenance by broadcast partner is not required
( beyond maintenance of the computer and internet connection). The
maintenance of the TeleAtlas server and connection with 511 is
borne by TeleAtlas.
o The TeleAtlas server allows easy expansion to numerous broadcast
partners. TeleAtlas approximates a one- time installation cost
between $ 10,000 and $ 25,000 per partner to cover initial set- up,
equipment and configuration costs. This cost is dependent on the
technology and labor required to interface TV511’ s technology with
that of the broadcast partner.
· Broadcast Partners
o The TV511 program was aired on television ( UHF Channel 32 and
cable) during the 2005 ITS World Congress for a period of six days.
Immediately following the conclusion of the World Congress, it was
replaced by other programming on KMTP. According to TeleAtlas,
KMTP received numerous complaints when its other programming
was temporarily suspended to show the TV511 broadcast. KMTP
could not be reached to discuss the TV511 broadcast.
o TeleAtlas suggested using city cable channels to attempt to reach
viewers with the program. A similar approach is currently in use in
Phoenix, AZ, and may be utilized in St. Louis, MO.
o The difficulty of finding a broadcast partner is a significant
downside to this technology. If no sponsor is found, it is difficult for
a television station to broadcast TV511 instead of a program that
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | TV511
June 2006
Page 3
has funding support ( usually through advertising). The broadcast
partner is likely to replace the TV511 broadcast with paid
programming or more popular programming. Sponsorship would
negate this concern. According to TeleAtlas, if they use KMTP, they
would need sponsorship of approximately $ 200,000 per year to
cover airtime and other costs. If city cable channels are used
( assuming that “ airtime” on these channels is provided at no cost),
sponsorship of about $ 10,000 per city per year, depending on the
number of cities, would be needed to procure TeleAtlas’
involvement.
Recommendation to Caltrans
PROS CONS
Provides enhanced incident information
without the use of computer/ internet
access
Requires sponsorship for broadcast
Displays incident information effectively
with coordinated voice and text displays
Does not include transit, travel time, speed
data, or slowdown incidents
Information is nearly identical to what is
posted on 511. org and SFgate. com
Cannot provide user- customized
information like the 511. org website and
phone service
Quickly cycles through all Bay Area
incidents ( every 3- 5 minutes)
Viewer required to watch non- relevant
information to obtain desired information
Updates incident information as it is
received
Some delay incurred in displaying a
percentage of incidents
Simple initialization with little to no
maintenance
Potential for revenue generation through
sponsorship
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | TV511
June 2006
Page 4
Evaluation Details
1. Delivery
Vendor’s Stated Objective
In Caltrans contract:
r Provide real- time traffic, transit, road conditions, and road- weather information
utilizing maps, voice and on- screen text
r Display program continuously between at least 5 to 8 a. m. on KMTP
r Allow viewers to obtain relevant information within a few minutes of turning to
program
r Aid viewers in making travel mode, schedule, and route decisions
r Make program available to 2 million households in Bay Area
Additional Assertions:
r Launch as part of 12th World Congress on ITS
2. Project Specifics
Deployment Date( s) and Time( s) Evaluation dates, times & weather
conditions
November, 2005
( one week as part of ITS World
Congress)
April 12, 2006 PM Peak – rain
April 13, 2006 AM Peak – no rain
April 27, 2006 PM Peak – no rain
April 28, 2006 Mid- day – no rain
Deployment Location( s) Evaluation Location( s)
San Francisco Bay Area:
KMTP ( UHF Channel 32, Cable TV)
San Francisco Bay Area
State highway network
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | TV511
June 2006
Page 5
3. Technology
3.1 Technology or System Description
TV511 utilizes data from the 511 database to create the displays and text. It provides
Bay Area visitors and residents another option besides the telephone and the internet to
access real- time traffic and transit data.
The TV511 Architecture requires interaction between TV511 and the 511 system.
TV511 has a Program Control Workstation at 511 facilities in Oakland, CA. The 511
Database Server communicates via XML and a formatted interface with the TV511
Database Server at TeleAtlas facilities in Menlo Park, CA. The TV511 Program Control
Workstation and the TV511 Database Server send information over the internet to the
TV511 Television Server at KMTP headquarters in San Francisco, CA. This server then
sends information to the KMTP UHF Broadcast Transmitter, which provides information
to Bay Area televisions via airwaves and cable.
Five coverage maps have been selected for on- screen display: Bay Area Overview,
North Bay, Peninsula, East Bay, and South Bay. These maps will display real- time
traffic, transit, road conditions, and road- weather information.
3.2 Previous Evaluations ( including vendor’s own) and/ or Similar Technology
Deployments
A similar product, called Traffic Check, was implemented in 1999 by Etak, the
predecessor to TeleAtlas, and broadcast on KMTP. This program used data collected
by Metro Networks, which utilized local reporters, government agencies, operations
studios, mobile units, and a fleet of airplanes to gather its data. Similar to the current
program, the displays and voice narration were automatically generated. The program
initially aired from 5 a. m. to 9 a. m. on weekdays on KMTP.
A similar program is currently deployed on several cities throughout the country. It
currently airs on four city cable stations in the Phoenix, AZ area. A similar system ran
for a couple years in Atlanta, GA beginning with the 1996 Summer Olympics. According
to TeleAtlas, the system has been well received in these cities. The Atlanta version was
operated until it became obsolete, and no update to the system was pursued. The St.
Louis, MO, area is an anticipated site for future deployment.
4. Performance Measures
Performance measures are defined here for this project and are divided into different
categories for evaluation and discussion: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Other
Performance Factors.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | TV511
June 2006
Page 6
Definition of Performance Measures
What does the technology or system measure?
According to the vendor, the TV511 program makes 511 traffic and transit
information available via television in the Bay Area, but does not collect or
measure information on its own.
4.1 Quantitative Outputs
Accuracy
1. What is the delay between the time 511 receives traffic information and when that
information is displayed by TV511?
Of the 17 incidents that appeared in the first evaluation PM peak hour, only
three had any delay between when they appeared on the 511. org site and when
they were added to the TV511 system. The delay for these three ranged from 7
to 16 minutes.
Of the 18 incidents that appeared in the second evaluation PM peak hour, six
had delay that ranged from 3 to 59 minutes. Of the 9 incidents that appeared
during evaluation in the a. m. peak hour, four had a delay ranging from 13 to 29
minutes between when they were displayed the 511. org website and TV511.
It appears that the 511. org database is not completely synchronized with the
database( s) that TV511 and SFgate. com obtain information from. In one
instance, a disabled vehicle on NB 101 at Miraposa and a vehicle fire incident
on Highway 4 were shown 16 and 20 minutes, respectively, later on TV511 than
when they were listed on 511. org. The posting time nearly matched for
SFgate. com and TV511, indicating that the delay is likely due to the output
database from 511, not TV511. Therefore, while the incident information is the
same, the 511. org and TV511 databases are not identical. This is beyond the
control of TeleAtlas.
2. What is the lag time between the visual displayed by a traffic camera and when it is
shown on TV511?
Feature not included in system.
3. What is the delay between when transit incidents or problems occur and when they
are displayed by the program?
Feature not included in system.
4. Is the visual information displayed by the program consistent with the data provided
via telephone and internet by 511? YES NO
5. Is the audio information consistent with the visual information? YES NO
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | TV511
June 2006
Page 7
There is an impressive variety of phrases used by the computer- generated
audio. In all but one case, the audio matched the text provided on- screen. For
an incident on Van Ness, the audio skipped over the word “ Van Ness,” saying
“ Road work eastbound at Lombard Street in San Francisco” instead of “ Road
work eastbound at Lombard Street [ Van Ness] in San Francisco.”
Reliability
1. Did the KMTP server or transmission fail at any point during the evaluation?
Did not test this during ITS World Congress. Subsequent evaluation was
performed using internet feed to a personal computer, where there was no
failure in obtaining the information. TV511 is not currently being aired by
KMTP.
2. Did the TV511 server fail at any point during the evaluation? YES NO
Productivity
1. What is the maximum amount of time that a person will need to watch the program to
find the information they are seeking?
The length of broadcast varies by the number of incidents at that time. During
an average peak traffic period, the program will have a cycle length of 2 to 4.5
minutes, including a 30 second advertisement period.
2. What is the average amount of time that a person will need to watch the program to
find the information they are seeking?
Very few incidents repeat on multiple map pages. The average amount of time
to watch until the desired information is viewed is approximately 60 to 150
seconds.
3. What is the average length of time that the program is watched?
Not applicable. Not broadcast during evaluation. Unable to survey potential
users.
4. How many people on average watch the program each day?
Not applicable. Not broadcast during evaluation. Unable to survey potential
users.
5. Are there any Bay Area households with cable television that do not receive the
program?
Not applicable. Not broadcast during evaluation. Unable to survey potential
users.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | TV511
June 2006
Page 8
4.2 Qualitative Outputs
Cost
1. Does the system need day- to- day maintenance or oversight? YES NO
2. Describe any maintenance that is required and the time required.
Since this content is generated by a software program, it is virtually
maintenance- free once it is operational.
Productivity
1. Evaluate the relevance and timeliness of the transit information that is shown.
Transit information is not shown.
2. Is the system capable of providing alternate route information for transit or roadway
incidents? YES NO
3. What type of manual operation is needed when information is broadcast in order to
keep the information accurate and useful?
None. The program would benefit from the ability for 511 control center
employees to insert additional transit or traffic related bulletins. The system
was originally intended to provide that feature and make it user- friendly.
4. Are the maps shown legible and informative? YES NO
5. Is the traffic camera footage shown as part of the program pertinent and beneficial?
Not applicable. Video camera footage not included in TV511 feed.
6. Does TV511 provide improved access to information when compared to existing
services available on the internet or via telephone?
It is virtually the same information as that provided on 511. org or by calling
511. If a person does not have access to either of these resources, TV511
would improve access to this information.
How do these performance measures relate to Caltrans’ 9 Performance Measures?
Caltrans’ performance measures are used to assess the operations of multi-modal
transportation systems in order to create a more accountable
framework for decision making. The following table relates the project
performance measures against the Caltrans performance measures.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | TV511
June 2006
Page 9
Caltrans 9 Performance Measures
Mobility/ Accessibility/
Reliability
Productivity
System Preservation
Safety
Environmental Quality
Coordinated
Transportation and
Land Use
Economic
Development
Return on Investment
Equity
Outputs Measured
Accuracy x
Cost X
Reliability x
Productivity x X X X X
4.3 Performance Factors
Interoperability and compatibility
The TV511 program includes incident information that is also available on the
511. org website or via telephone. The information feed comes from the 511
database, so it does not include any additional information that is not available
on the 511. org website. As a result, there is a consistency between all of the
traveler information that is being disseminated.
Scalability and Sensitivity
KMTP broadcast TV511 during the ITS World Congress ( November 2005) and
ceased broadcasting shortly afterwards. There is no current viewer base for
the program. KMTP did not return queries during the evaluation period that
measured the user base. Considering these factors, it is not possible to
determine the following:
· Demand for the provision of this service during the p. m. peak hour or for
special events
· Opportunity by KMTP to expand the service to other times of day
· Impact on viewership by an increase in the regional area covered by 511
Increasing the coverage area may negatively impact the viewers’ ability to
quickly obtain useful information if there are irrelevant maps that the viewer
would need to view prior to receiving useful information. The increase in
viewing time depends on the increase in size of the regional area and number
of local maps that are shown in a single loop.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | TV511
June 2006
Page 10
Staffing and Training
No day- to- day staff or specialized training would be required by the broadcast
station staff. Installing the program onto a local computer took approximately
20 minutes after which the output for the computer is ready for display. The
loop runs continuously until interrupted by staff.
Cost
TeleAtlas approximates a one- time installation cost between $ 10,000 and
$ 25,000 per partner to cover initial set- up, equipment and configuration costs.
The broadcast partner would need to obtain equipment ( TV511 Television
Server, internet communications equipment) in addition to the transmission
equipment ( which is assumed to already be available by the partner). Day- to-day
staff needs would fall under maintenance of the computer and Internet
connection.
According to TeleAtlas, the on- going cost of the program for the broadcast
partner and TeleAtlas is approximately $ 200,000 per year to cover airtime,
maintenance and profit for TeleAtlas. This money would be approximately
split between the broadcast partner and TeleAtlas. If city cable channels were
used ( assuming that “ airtime” on these channels is provided at no cost), the
fee for TeleAtlas’ provision of its service is about $ 10,000 per city per year,
depending on the number of cities.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | TV511
June 2006
Page 11
5. Evaluation Methodology
This section describes the process and procedure for conducting the evaluation of
TeleAtlas TV511.
Performance measures were evaluated during a real- time evaluation of the TV511
broadcast during peak periods and obtaining program characteristics from
TeleAtlas, KMTP and viewers.
Real- Time Evaluation ( Accuracy & Reliability)
· Compare TV511 displays with the following information to determine delay
and accuracy of broadcast information:
o 511 speed data
o Real- time traffic cameras
o Transit data
· Observe TV511 programs to evaluate:
o Accuracy of information
o Transmission errors and error messages
o Length of viewing time needed to obtain information
o Depth and relevance of information
o Quality of displays and commentary
Obtain Broadcast Program Characteristics
· Communicate with Tele Atlas to obtain the following information:
o Cost of production, equipment, airtime and maintenance
o Staffing requirements
· Communicate with KMTP to obtain the following information:
o Number of viewers
o Scheduling restrictions
o Demand for expanded coverage
· Obtain feedback from viewers on the following items:
o Viewing time required to obtain relevant information
o Average viewing time
o Relevance of information
o Quality of displays and commentary
o Demand for expanded coverage
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | TV511
June 2006
Page 12
6. Evaluation Results
Observations of the TV511 system were conducted during the following periods:
· April 12, 2006 PM Peak
· April 13, 2006 AM Peak
· April 27, 2006 PM Peak
· April 28, 2006 Mid- day
Accuracy
The program’s technology achieves its goal of allowing users to access 511
traveler information via their television sets. Incidents are clearly indicated with
icons on the regional freeway maps. The four focused coverage maps effectively
cover the entire Bay Area. The program is a reasonable time length, such that a
person would probably not mind watching an entire cycle to view the relevant
information. The program displays text and has accurate accompanying audio for
each incident, describing the location, type and effect on the roadway of each
incident. The only issue detected with the audio is that zeroes in the time of
incident are not included. For example, “ 2: 07” was read as “ 2: 7”.
In a couple of instances, incidents were repeated on multiple map views. One
incident on Interstate 680 was repeated on three different maps on the same cycle.
This is beneficial if a person was only paying attention to announcements for a
specific map, but it has the downside of lengthening the program with repeat
information.
The TV511 program references a 511 MTC database to obtain its incident
information. Therefore, the accuracy of TV511 depends on the accuracy of the
511 database. There were no major issues with the accuracy of the incident
information. All incidents were reported correctly when compared to the 511. org
website and the traffic incident information page at SFgate. com. Incidents were
also updated continuously, both as conditions changed and as new incidents
developed. There was a delay in the broadcasting of approximately 30% of the
incidents, usually only a matter of a few minutes. Of the incidents for which there
was some delay in being posted, that delay averaged 24 minutes. The delay was
also noticed in the traffic incident output on SFgate. com, which may use the same
traffic data output from MTC as TV511. For cases where information was late in
being displayed by TV511, TeleAtlas hypothesized that its database or the MTC
database it was using was not entirely synchronized with the database supplying
the 511. org website or SFgate. com.
For one incident in the mid- day evaluation period, the location of the incident and
time of incident was read but no incident type or roadway closure was included.
The text at the bottom of the screen was “ See script.” A check of the 511. org
website at that time yielded the same result. Therefore, the error was with the 511
database, not with TV511.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | TV511
June 2006
Page 13
Some traffic information displayed on 511. org and SFgate. com was not displayed
by TV511 at any point during the program. During each of the three peak periods
evaluated, two long- term construction- related road closures were not included on
TV511 but were shown on 511. org. In addition, an event at the Cow Palace and
two severe traffic alerts/ road closures were not displayed by the system, but were
shown on 511. org.
Reliability
There were no reliability issues observed during the evaluation, beyond the
previously discussed delay in displaying some of the incidents. For the
evaluation, the internet feed of the program was used. During no point did the
feed discontinue or stall. Of course the reliability of the system is dependent on
the broadcasting station as well. At the time of the evaluation, the broadcast
partner, KMTP, had chosen to broadcast other programming, highlighting a
significant accessibility concern for the TV511 program. Viewers cannot access
the TV511 program if there is no sponsorship, or the broadcasting station
chooses to air other programming,
Broadcast Program Characteristics
The program was aired on broadcast television during the 2005 ITS World
Congress. Immediately following the conclusion of the World Congress, it was
replaced by other programming on KMTP. KMTP could not be reached to discuss
the TV511 program. Information regarding the number of viewers, scheduling
restrictions and demand for expanded coverage could not be obtained.
According to TeleAtlas, KMTP received numerous complaints when its other
programming was temporarily suspended to show the TV511 broadcast.
Since the program is not being broadcast, feedback from viewers could not be
obtained.
From an operational standpoint, the system is simple to initialize and operate. A
computer at the broadcast station with an internet connection to the TV511 server
is required. TeleAtlas provides an installation CD for placing the TV511 program
on the computer and configuring the connection to the TV511 server. Installing
the program took approximately 20 minutes, after which the output for the
computer is ready for display on a computer monitor or to be broadcast.
No day- to- day maintenance is required of the broadcast partner outside of
maintaining the computer and internet connection. The maintenance of the
TeleAtlas server and connection with 511 is borne by TeleAtlas.
The TeleAtlas server allows easy expansion to numerous broadcast partners.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | TV511
June 2006
Page 14
TeleAtlas suggested using city cable channels to attempt to reach viewers with
the program. A similar approach is currently in use in Phoenix, AZ and may be
utilized in St. Louis, MO.
The difficulty of finding a broadcast partner is a significant downside to this
technology. If no funding sponsor is found, the broadcast partner is likely to
replace TV511 with paid programming or more popular programming.
Sponsorship would negate this concern.
Other observations
There are a few significant features that are missing from the program. Most
noteworthy, is that speed information is not displayed, only incident information.
While this program indicates whether an incident is present and the user can
insinuate a slowdown will occur from that, the user is unable to determine how
congested the freeways are at any point on the system or their expected travel
time. This limits the overall value for the viewer. Additionally, the program does
not display several types of congestion generators, such as general slowdowns,
special events, construction activities, and landslides. Additionally, transit
information is notably absent from the program. For example, the SFgate website
listed a 15 to 20- minute delay on two BART routes during one of the evaluation
periods, but that information was not broadcast by TV511.
It would be beneficial for the service to allow bulletins to be posted remotely by
511 staff, which would require some day- to- day effort by 511 staff to enter the
messages. This would require minor changes to the software program. If these
messages are sent directly to the TV511 server, they would not be included in the
511 database since the communications between the 511 database and the TV511
serverServer are one- way only.
According to TeleAtlas, the TV511 program could be improved relatively easily to
include all the features mentioned above. They were not included in the evaluated
version due to budget and time constraints.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | TV511
June 2006
Page 15
7. Recommendation to Caltrans
PROS CONS
Provides enhanced incident information
without the use of computer/ internet
access
Requires sponsorship for broadcast
Displays incident information effectively
with coordinated voice and text displays
Does not include transit, travel time, speed
data, or slowdown incidents
Information is nearly identical to what is
posted on 511. org and SFgate. com
Cannot provide user- customized
information like the 511. org website and
phone service
Quickly cycles through all Bay Area
incidents ( every 3- 5 minutes)
Viewer required to watch non- relevant
information to obtain desired information
Updates incident information as it is
received
Some delay incurred in displaying a
percentage of incidents
Simple initialization with little to no
maintenance
Potential for revenue generation through
sponsorship
P:\ 097317000 - Caltrans Pilot Project Demonstration - RRD\ VendorDemonstrations\ Tele Atlas - RRD\ Final EVALUATION - Tele Atlas 20060602. doc
ITS Pilot Project Demonstration
ENCOM Wireless
Evaluation
Prepared for
Caltrans
December 2006
FINAL
Prepared By
Kimley- Horn and
Associates
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page i
ITS Pilot Project Evaluation
EVALUATION SUMMARY........................................................................................... 1
EVALUATION DETAILS ............................................................................................. 4
1. Delivery ................................................................................................................... 4
2. Project Specifics...................................................................................................... 4
3. Technology.............................................................................................................. 5
3.1 Technology or System Description.................................................................................................... 5
3.2 Previous Evaluations ( including vendor’s own) and/ or Similar Technology Deployments............. 8
3.3 Cost ............................................................................................................................... ..................... 8
4. Performance Measures ........................................................................................... 8
4.1 Quantitative Outputs........................................................................................................................ .. 8
4.2 Qualitative Outputs ........................................................................................................................... 14
4.3 Performance Factors........................................................................................................................ 16
5. Evaluation Methodology ........................................................................................ 18
6. Evaluation Results................................................................................................. 19
7. Recommendation to Caltrans ................................................................................ 29
Appendix A: Vendor Equipment Specification Sheets
Appendix B: Equipment Installation Photos
Vendor Contact Information:
ENCOM WIRELESS
Joaquin Segl
Technical Sales Representative
ENCOM Wireless Data Solutions Inc.
Ph: ( 403) 230- 1122 ext 216
Cell: ( 403) 651- 1066
joaquins@ encomwireless. com
www. encomwireless. com
ENCOM Wireless
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 1
Evaluation Summary
Vendor/ Project – ENCOM Wireless Data Solutions
ENCOM wireless communication units ( radio modems) establish a wireless
communication link between various traffic monitoring and control systems. The
objective of this technology is to provide a cost- effective alternative to the hardwire cable
communications in the transportation engineering industry.
Delivery: Does demonstration satisfy Vendor’s stated objectives for Caltrans?
Installment is less expensive than deployment of hardwire communication
YES NO
Depending on the length of conduit required for hardwire communication and
the conduit installation cost, installing an ENCOM radio system may be less
expensive than deploying hardwire communication.
Installment is less disruptive than deployment of hardwire communication
YES NO
Using a wireless systems can eliminate the need to install long stretches of
conduit ( either along on in the roadway) that may result in traffic disruption.
There would be less disruption to traffic as long as the cabinets on which
ENCOM devices are being installed are outside the travel way.
Maximizes flexibility for new deployment locations YES NO
ENCOM radios could be used to establish communications with new locations
( with sufficient line of sight) in less time than if new conduit needed to be
installed. ENCOM radios could also be used for temporary purposes at
existing locations ( for instance, construction zones where temporarily
disconnection of hardwire communication might be required).
Enables a single TMS/ RMS controller to serve multiple detection locations
YES NO NOT VERIFIED
ENCOM did not establish this for evaluation.
Useful when installed hardwire communications fail YES NO
In a situation where hardwire communications fail, ENCOM radios could be
used to quickly reestablish communications if sufficient line of sight exists
while the hardwire communications are being diagnosed.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 2
Key Observations
Installation of an ENCOM wireless communications link was observed to be
done quickly and to provide a communications link in place of a hardwire
connection. However, the observed communications rate with the ENCOM link
in place was lower than when the hardwire link was in place. It appears that
the communications rate of the ENCOM wireless connection was between 75%
and 80% compared to about 99% with the hardwire connection. ENCOM was
not given the opportunity to additionally troubleshoot or make adjustments to
these deployments.
The vendor claims that the communications rate experienced with a wireless
connection should be the same as with a hardwire connection. However,
factors such as poor line of sight, poor antenna alignment, bad radio path or
improper installation of drivers could reduce the actual communications rate.
Addressing these issues could require more troubleshooting and equipment
configuration than when using hardwire connections.
In general, an ENCOM wireless connection can be installed more quickly than
a traditional hardwire connection and with less disruption to traffic. While the
radio may be more expensive than a traditional copper FSK modem, utilizing
an ENCOM wireless radio may be more cost effective depending on the length
of conduit and cable that is being replaced. Assuming an installation cost of
$ 50 per foot for conduit, the ENCOM wireless solution could be cost effective
at 130 feet, and perhaps even shorter if one considered a reduced traffic
control cost.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 3
Recommendation to Caltrans
PROS CONS
Does not require trenching or directional
drilling for installation of conduit; avoids
traffic disruption due to conduit installation
Requires near line of sight between
antennas free of obstructions due to
buildings and vegetation.
May be less expensive in situations where
conduit installation is expensive or difficult
to install.
Additional ongoing troubleshooting/
equipment configuration may be required
over hardwire connections.
Can be installed more quickly than when
conduit installation is required; useful as a
temporary solution when hardwire
communication cables are broken or are
removed during construction.
Increased maintenance to trim vegetation
could be needed to maintain line of sight.
Uses RS232 and FSK protocols commonly
used by traffic controllers.
Line of sight could be blocked by future
buildings.
Utilizes license- free, low- power
frequencies for communications.
Antennas might attract unwanted attention
to cabinets; issues related to damage and
theft of equipment might arise.
Can handle point- to- point and point- to-multipoint
configurations.
Drilling holes in the cabinet walls could be
required for antenna cables; these holes
are additional location for dirt, dust and
moisture to enter cabinet. If ENCOM
equipment is relocated to another location,
these holes would need to be sealed.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 4
Evaluation Details
1. Delivery
Vendor’s Stated Objective In Caltrans contract:
r Eliminates the need for long lead- in cables
r Cost- effective wireless communication system
r Less disruptive than deployment of “ hardwire” communications
r Maximizes deployment location flexibility
r Enable a single TMS/ RMS controller serve multiple detection locations
r Designed to have extremely low signal latency
r Very simple installation process
Additional Assertions:
r Equipment is maintenance free
r Robust design and can withstand extremely high/ low temperatures (- 40oC to 80oC)
2. Project Specifics
Deployment Locations and Dates Evaluation Locations and Dates
Include weather conditions
1. Valley Blvd On Ramp at I- 10 EB, City
of El Monte, California ( Caltrans LDS
# 715158):
Installation: 10/ 17/ 2005
Approx. operational date: 11/ 01/ 2005
2. Baldwin Ave On Ramp at I- 10 EB,
City of El Monte, California ( Caltrans
LDS # 715286):
Installation: 10/ 17/ 2005
Approx. operational date: 11/ 01/ 2005
3. Madre St Ramps at I- 210 EB, City of
Pasadena, California ( Caltrans LDS
# 715484):
Installation: 6/ 29/ 2006
Approx. operational date: 6/ 29/ 2006
Evaluation locations are same as
deployment locations:
1. Valley Blvd On- ramp:
Before* – 08/ 25/ 2005 to 09/ 01/ 2005;
After* – 11/ 20/ 2005 to 11/ 27/ 2005
2. Baldwin Ave On- ramp:
Before* – No data ( no communications
in place);
After* – 01/ 10/ 2006 to 01/ 17/ 2006
3. Madre St Ramps:
Before* – 04/ 20/ 2006 to 04/ 27/ 2006;
After* - 08/ 25/ 2006 to 09/ 01/ 2006
Weather Data not available
*“ Before” date indicates communication on 4- pair copper interconnect. “ After” date indicates communication on ENCOM
wireless equipment
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 5
Information used for the evaluation included field observation of equipment installation,
field investigation of installed equipment, collecting and checking vendor- supplied
information, and interviews with Caltrans technical and engineering staff. Performance
data consisted of comparing the communications rate ( up- time) between the existing
hardwire copper connections and with the ENCOM wireless in place. ( Accuracy of the
data transmission was originally included in the evaluation plan, but was not pursued
because the needed information for comparison was not readily available.)
3. Technology
3.1 Technology or System Description
ENCOM wireless data modems provide wireless communication between various traffic
monitoring and control systems, eliminating the need for hardwire communication
between them. ENCOM products use license free, frequency hopping spread spectrum
technology ( FHSS) and the deployment locations in this evaluation utilized ENCOM
Model 5100 ( rack mounted and shelf mounted) and Model 5200 equipment ( located in
demarcation cabinets). Specification sheets for ENCOM equipment installed for this
evaluation are located in Appendix A.
ENCOM wireless devices were installed at 3 separate locations as part of the Pilot
Project. Two of these applications are similar. These two locations would replace the
existing hardwire copper connection with the ENCOM wireless connection between the
ramp metering controller and the telephone demarcation cabinet. ( Caltrans TMC polls
data using a leased telephone line from the demarcation cabinet.) The third application
would replace the existing hardwire copper connection with the ENCOM wireless
connection between two ramp metering controllers ( on- ramp and off- ramp).
Communication network details of each deployment location are described below and
field photos of the deployments are shown in Appendix B.
Valley Boulevard/ I- 10 ( eastbound) on- ramp and Baldwin Avenue/ I- 10 ( eastbound)
on- ramps
Figure 1 and Figure 2 illustrate the communication details for the Valley Boulevard/ I- 10
( eastbound) on- ramp and Baldwin Avenue/ I- 10 ( eastbound) on- ramp application. These
applications connect a Model 170 controller with a demarcation cabinet. Caltrans TMC
is connected to the demarcation cabinet over a telephone line and polls the location
every 30 seconds. Prior to the evaluation, the on- ramp Model 170 controller at the
Valley Boulevard location communicated with the existing telephone ( TELCO)
demarcation cabinet via a 4- pair copper interconnect cable. This connection was
replaced with ENCOM Model 5100 wireless radios at the telephone demarcation cabinet
and the controller cabinet during the evaluation. ( There was no existing communication
for the Baldwin Avenue location.)
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 6
Figure 1: Valley On- Ramp at I- 10 E ENCOM Application
Figure 2: Baldwin On- Ramp at I- 10 E ENCOM Application
Madre Street/ I- 210 ( eastbound) location
Figure 3 illustrates the communication details for the Madre Street / I- 210 ( eastbound)
application. For this application, the hardwire connection between two data bridges was
replaced by a wireless connection. The existing communications configuration has the
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 7
on- ramp 170 controller communicating with the off- ramp Traffic Monitoring Station ( 170
controller) via a 4- pair copper interconnect using data bridges at both locations. The
data bridge at the off- ramp location connects the controller and the main trunk line ( 50
pair copper line) via a 6- pair # 22 connection. Caltrans TMC is connected to the main
trunk line and polls the location every 30 seconds. For the evaluation, Model 5100- S
Radio was installed at the off- ramp ( Master) location and Model 5100- R Radio was
installed at the on- ramp ( Remote) location.
Figure 3: Madre Street Ramps at I- 210 E ENCOM Application
Typical Installation Procedure
As per ENCOM, the equipment installation procedure typically involves the following
steps:
1. Side- mounting the Yagi- antenna on the traffic controller/ demarcation cabinet
using brackets to hold it to the side.
2. Bringing the antenna cable into the cabinet ( by drilling a hole on top of the
cabinet) to connect to ENCOM 5100 series modem which is rack- mounted inside
the cabinet. The antenna cable is routed through a surge protector ( installed
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 8
inside the cabinet) before connecting to the ENCOM modem. The antenna cable
connects to the modem through a reducer.
3. The modem is connected to a bridge behind the controller, which serves as the
connection point between the two cabinet controllers ( via a 4- pair copper cable).
4. ENCOM equipment inside the cabinet draws power from the 170 controller. The
Vendor claims that typical power consumption of an ENCOM 5100 device is less
than 100mA ( standby) and less than 125mA ( 100mW TX).
3.2 Previous Evaluations ( including vendor’s own) and/ or Similar Technology Deployments
This equipment is currently being deployed in several areas in North America. It is not
known if these deployments have been evaluated independently or by the agencies that
are using them so it is not possible to give a summary of performance in other
deployments.
3.3 Cost
The equipment list price for the Model 5200 radio is $ 1,350 and the equipment list price
for the Model 5100 radio is $ 1,790. This does not include miscellaneous mounting and
cabling or installation costs. With an assumed labor rate of $ 100 per hour, the labor
installation cost is approximately $ 500 per site ($ 1000 for a two point system).
4. Performance Measures
Performance measures are defined here for this project and are divided into different
categories for evaluation and discussion: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Other
Performance Factors.
Definition of Performance Measures
The ENCOM wireless data modems provide wireless links for data communication
between traffic monitoring devices such as inductive loops and traffic controllers.
4.1 Quantitative Outputs
Accuracy
1. Does the presence of vegetation/ high- rise buildings affect the signal strength/ block
the transmission signal? YES NO
During the installation at Madre St/ I- 210 E, there were line of sight issues due
to the obstruction of freeway infrastructure and presence of vegetation. Other
locations were not considered for ENCOM application due to possible line of
sight issues.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 9
2. What is the approximate distance beyond which the signal strength shows a
decrease in accuracy?
The Vendor claims that ENCOM equipment can communicate up to 20 miles
distance with proper line of sight.
3. Does the curvature ( geometry) of the roadway affect the transmitted signal?
YES NO
The geometry of the roadway does not affect the transmitted signal as long as
there is line of sight.
4. Are measurements affected by low light conditions? YES NO
Nighttime ( low light) conditions did not appear to have an impact on
measurements.
5. Are measurements affected by low visibility/ cloudy/ foggy conditions?
YES NO NOT EVALUATED
Weather information was not available, so it was not possible to evaluate the
impact of low visibility/ cloudy/ foggy conditions.
6. What is the signal latency of the wireless equipment compared to fiber or copper?
The vendor claims that the end- to- end signal latency of ENCOM wireless
equipment is not more that 8 milliseconds. For a rough comparison, the signal
latency of a typical Ethernet ( copper) connection is 0.3 milliseconds and 0.2
milliseconds for fiber ( assuming a 20 mile network).
7. Is the communication delay time caused due to signal latency below the system
latency constraints? YES NO NOT EVALUATED
Information on system latency constraints were not available.
8. Does the presence of local RF interference affect the accuracy of the signal
transmission? YES NO
Vendor claims that by utilizing the tools included with the ENCOM devices, the
accuracy of the signal transmission should match the accuracy of hardwire
connection. These tools include built- in spectrum analyzer to identify sources
of interference and a remote diagnostic tool to optimize the radio path.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 10
Cost
1. Are any other additional components necessary for the equipment to function?
YES NO
Other additional components needed for each radio includes a Yagi antenna
( and mounting brackets), an antenna pole, and miscellaneous cabling ( e. g.,
antenna and communication), surge protector and connectors. The estimated
costs for this equipment is $ 600.
2. What is the length and cost of installation?
As per the vendor, the complete installation and testing/ configuration for a
location that has clear line of sight could be performed between 75 to 90
minutes with 2 personnel. Installation at one location was observed to take
about 2 ½ hours with 2 trained persons. The estimated cost of installation
( assuming a labor rate of $ 100 per hour) is $ 500. No special training would be
anticipated for typical Caltrans maintenance crew to install or configure
Encom equipment ( modem and antenna).
3. How many loop detection stations can be linked to one TMS/ RMS controller without
introducing significant latency?
Vendor claims that up to 255 loop detection stations could be linked to a single
ENCOM access point. This was not verified as part of this evaluation. The
Valley Boulevard and Baldwin Avenue locations connected one controller to
one demarcation cabinet. The Madre location connected a Model 170
controller with a remote data bridge with two Model 170 controllers connected
to it.
4. Are there any recurring costs for training/ maintenance services? YES NO
The vendor claims that the operation is maintenance free. During the Pilot
Project period, there was no record of equipment maintenance requests or
services. Since the evaluation was short, it was not possible to evaluate if
periodic maintenance is needed to sustain performance.
5. Is this equipment useful in areas where there is already existing hardwire
communication along the roadway? YES NO
ENCOM radios could be useful to communicate with new locations given
sufficient line of sight without expanding the existing hardwire
communications. ENCOM radios could also be used for temporary purposes
at existing locations ( for instance, construction zones where temporarily
disconnection of hardwire communication might be required). ENCOM radios
might not be useful at locations where there are existing communication
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 11
systems unless the controlling agency requires additional/ alternative
communication needs.
6. Does the equipment require frequent trimming/ maintenance of trees/ vegetation along
the line of sight to maintain necessary line of sight? YES NO
If there is vegetation in the line of sight, regular trimming would be required to
maintain sufficient line of sight.
7. What are the costs associated with power requirements to operate the equipment?
ENCOM equipment inside the cabinet draws power from the detector rack via
the edge connector. Vendor claims that ENCOM equipment typically requires
less than 100mA in standby mode, and less than 125mA when transmitting at
100mW.
8. Describe the cost savings in comparison to hardwire communications.
Figure 4 illustrates the cost of a point- to- point ENCOM Model 5100/ 5200
system with the cost of conduit installation for various lengths of conduit and
cable ($ 50 per foot, $ 60 per foot, $ 70 per foot of conduit). In this figure, the
breakeven distance occurs at 130 feet assuming $ 25 per feet of conduit. The
breakeven distance assuming $ 60 per feet and $ 70 per feet of conduit is
approximately 108 feet and 94 feet, respectively. Beyond this distance, given
sufficient line of sight and data transmission efficiency of ENCOM
communication system, the ENCOM equipment would be cheaper than
installing the conduit and cabling needed to connect the two points.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 12
$ 0
$ 2,000
$ 4,000
$ 6,000
$ 8,000
$ 10,000
$ 12,000
$ 14,000
$ 16,000
25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200
Distance ( feet)
Cost ($)
$ 50
$ 60
$ 70
ENCOM
Figure 4: Cost Comparison: ENCOM and HARDWIRE COMMUNICATION
Reliability
1. Was traffic disrupted during installation? YES NO
Vendor claims that there is no disruption to traffic during installation. There
was no traffic disruption observed during the Madre Street installation.
2. If yes, what was the length of time of the disruption and/ or length of disruption?
Not Applicable. See Question 1 ( above).
3. Did the units fail during the evaluation period? YES NO
None of the ENCOM units failed during the evaluation period.
4. How many times did the communications fail to transmit data?
During the “ after” evaluation period ( one week), the communications rate was
73.9% for the Valley Boulevard location, 49.6% for the Baldwin Avenue
location, and 72.9% for the Madre Street location. See Section 6 ( Evaluation
Results) for additional information. It is unclear if this indicates that the data
was not transmitted or if it was not received ( due to calibration and
configuration issues.)
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 13
5. What is the maximum bandwidth at which the device operates?
Vendor claims up to 115kbps sustained data throughput is capable with the
Model 5100/ 5200 radios. This claim was not verified. Information regarding
the bandwidths used for the deployment applications was not available.
6. What was the average bandwidth in a 24- hour period?
Average and minimum bandwidth information was not available.
7. What was the deviation from that average bandwidth?
See Question 6 ( above).
8. What was the lowest measured bandwidth?
See Question 6 ( above).
9. Did any devices need to be replaced or repaired during the evaluation? If so, how
many and what was the amount of time before the replacement or repair and the
cost of the replacement/ repair?
The field/ installation crew ( Crosstown Electric) noticed that the communication
line to the telephone demarcation cabinet was disconnected ( cause unknown)
at the Baldwin Avenue location. It was fixed between April 24th and April 28th,
2006. However, this loss of communication is not attributed to ENCOM
devices.
10. Is the device designed to operate at extreme ( hot or cold) temperatures
( robustness)? YES NO
Vendor claims that the equipment works in the temperature range of - 40 􀃛 C to
+ 80 􀃛 C (- 40 􀃛 F to 176 􀃛 F).
11. Once configured and operational, how often does the equipment need to be
reconfigured or maintained to provide acceptable service?
Due to the short duration of the evaluation period, there was no
reconfiguration or maintenance that was performed during the course of the
pilot project. As previously mentioned, vegetation trimming and possible
antenna alignment maintenance may be required to maintain operability.
Productivity
1. What is the lag time between when the time data is measured and when it is
received at the monitoring station?
Information is not available.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 14
2. Does the equipment use/ need any special software? YES NO
Vendor claims that ENCOM equipment is completely configurable with
Windows ™ based ControlPAK ™ Software ( included). Further, the Vendor
claims that for standard traffic interconnect applications, a wide range of pre-built
and pre- tested application files are included, allowing “ plug- and- play”
setup for specific controllers and most major controller manufacturer’s
products and third party applications are represented.
4.2 Qualitative Outputs
Accuracy
1. How does the distance between devices impact the accuracy of the device?
According to the vendor, the accuracy of the device should not be impacted as
long as there is sufficient signal strength. Vendor claims range of 20 miles ( if
line of sight is sufficient). The distances between antennas for these
deployment locations was approximately 700- 800 feet.
2. Is the system line of sight specific? YES NO
Compatibility/ Interoperability
1. Is the equipment compatible with different antennas? YES NO
The vendor claims that the equipment is compatible with Yagi and Omni
antennas. All the three applications ( locations) have Yagi antennas installed.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 15
2. Can the equipment operate with different traffic controllers available in the industry
and/ or used by Caltrans? YES NO
The vendor claims that ENCOM devices have drivers ( application files) for
most major controller manufacturer’s products. All the three applications
( locations) in this evaluation have 170 controllers.
3. Can the equipment be used for other freeway monitoring applications ( e. g. volume,
queue detection, video)? YES NO
ENCOM equipment could be used for applications that require up to 115kbps
bandwidth ( such as data transmission). Video applications might require
higher bandwidth.
Reliability
1. How does inclement weather affect the performance of the equipment? Describe the
type of weather and any effect on the system’s range, accuracy and communications
capabilities:
Weather information not available. Vendor claims that ENCOM devices can
function in the temperature range of - 40 􀃛 C to + 80 􀃛 C (- 40 􀃛 F to 176 􀃛 F). Like most
wireless applications, foggy and cloudy weather conditions might disrupt the
wireless communication.
2. Can Caltrans maintain and/ or install the device? YES NO
3. What is the level of encryption?
Vendor claims that the wireless communication has 32- bit encryption.
Productivity
1. Does device improve Caltrans’ ability to gather/ process/ disseminate data more
efficiently? YES NO
ENCOM applications could be used for temporary purposes at existing
locations ( for instance, construction zones where it might be required to
temporarily disconnect existing hardwire communication) or locations where it
would be infeasible to install conduit. Installation of an ENCOM system would
be expected to be quicker than a hardwire installation.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 16
2. How do these performance measures relate to Caltrans’ 9 Performance Measures?
Caltrans’ performance measures are used to assess the operations of multi-modal
transportation systems in order to create a more accountable
framework for decision making. The following table relates the project
performance measures against the Caltrans performance measures.
Caltrans 9 Performance Measures
Mobility/ Accessibility/
Reliability
Productivity
System Preservation
Safety
Environmental Quality
Coordinated
Transportation and
Land Use
Economic
Development
Return on Investment
Equity
Outputs Measured
Accuracy ü
Cost ü ü ü
Compatibility/ Interoperability ü ü ü
Reliability ü ü
Productivity ü ü ü ü
4.3 Performance Factors
Interoperability and compatibility
The Model 5100 and Model 5200 ENCOM equipment are serial radios that
utilize serial communication protocol common to the traffic signal control
industry. The Model 5100 radio supports both RS- 232 and FSK protocols,
while the Model 5200 radio supports only the RS- 232 protocol. This support
should allow the system to easily integrate with other traffic signal control
devices and other communication systems.
Line of sight issues
The ENCOM radios require line of sight between antennas for satisfactory
operation. This may require a sight- and- path survey to be conducted prior to
choosing to install ENCOM radios instead of traditional hardwire connections.
Some additional testing may be required when placing the antennas and
configuring the radios to maximize to radio path. For the Madre Street
location, the installation technicians performed a quick survey to confirm
sufficient line of sight. Caltrans District 7 staff and the installation technicians
also considered some other locations to install ENCOM devices prior to
choosing this location. However, those locations were discarded due to
insufficient line of sight.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 17
Interference with other wireless operations and emergency service operations
The Model 5100 and Model 5200 radios operate on the 900 MHz and 2.4 GHz
unlicensed bands with a maximum output of 1 watt. Due to these restrictions,
their operation is unlikely to interfere with emergency service operations that
typically operate on a licensed frequency.
However, ENCOM radios face a chance of interference with other users since
there are no restrictions for others to operate on the 900 MHz and 2.4 GHz
bands. ENCOM radios come with various tools to minimize the chance of
interference, including built- in spectrum analyzer ( to identify sources of
interference) and a remote diagnostic tool to optimize the radio path. These
tools require some training.
System Configuration and Scalability
Vendor claims that it is possible to utilize these devices in Point to Point, Point
to Multipoint, Multipoint to Point, and Multipoint to Multipoint system
configurations. Since one ENCOM master device can connect and receive
data from multiple remote ENCOM devices, this set- up can reduce costs
compared to installing each pair of Master- Remote configuration.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 18
5. Evaluation Methodology
This section describes how the performance measures described above were evaluated.
· Communicate with vendor regarding:
o ENCOM equipment capabilities
o ENCOM equipment interoperability and compatibility
o Installation procedures and requirements
o Testing procedures and requirements ( including identifying probable
sources for failure and signal loss)
o ENCOM equipment costs
o ENCOM equipment maintenance/ operational requirements
o System restrictions
· Observe installation of ENCOM equipment at test locations.
· Examine data received by Caltrans to determine the following for the “ before”
and “ after” condition:
o Number of readings
o Number of weak data transmissions
o Number of failed units/ duration of failure
o Bandwidth levels
o Latency time of data transmission
o Accuracy of data transmitted by ENCOM wireless systems
· Communicate with Caltrans to determine:
o Integration and data transmission capabilities of ENCOM wireless
systems compared with hardwire communication systems
o Benefit gained from ENCOM wireless equipment
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 19
6. Evaluation Results
Installation Observations
Installation of ENCOM equipment at the Valley Boulevard and Baldwin Avenue locations
was not observed. Installation of ENCOM equipment at the Madre Street location was
observed.
Before/ After Comparison
In order to assess the impacts of the change in communications rate between the type of
connection ( hardwire or ENCOM wireless), communications rate data was gathered for a
continuous one week of two months before and two monts after the ENCOM operational
date. It is assumed that any differences observed in the communications rate would be
due solely to the type of connection. Data was obtained from Performance Management
System ( PeMS) website maintained by University of California, Berkeley in order to
assess the performance of the ENCOM wireless devices. The dates of the observation
and the before/ after periods are listed in Section 2. Project Specifics ( above). The
following figures and tables present the analysis results for the three ENCOM locations.
Valley Boulevard Location
As shown in Figure 4 and Figure 5, the communications rate ( percentage of expected
samples) in the “ before” period ( copper interconnect) ranged between 99.5% and 99.9%
with an average of 99.7%. During the “ after” period ( with ENCOM wireless
communication in place), the communications rate ranged between 73.0 and 74.5% with
an average of 73.7%.
Before - % of Expected Samples
Valley Blvd/ I- 10E
50.0
55.0
60.0
65.0
70.0
75.0
80.0
85.0
90.0
95.0
100.0
8/ 25/ 05 8/ 26/ 05 8/ 27/ 05 8/ 28/ 05 8/ 29/ 05 8/ 30/ 05 8/ 31/ 05 9/ 1/ 05
Date
% of Expected Samples
% of Expected Samples
Figure 4: Valley Blvd/ I- 10E – Before Scenario Results
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 20
After - % of Expected Samples
Valley Blvd/ I- 10E
50.0
55.0
60.0
65.0
70.0
75.0
80.0
85.0
90.0
95.0
100.0
11/ 20/ 05 11/ 21/ 05 11/ 22/ 05 11/ 23/ 05 11/ 24/ 05 11/ 25/ 05 11/ 26/ 05 11/ 27/ 05
Date
% of Expected Samples
% of Expected Samples
Figure 5: Valley Blvd/ I- 10 E – After Scenario Results
Table 1: Valley Blvd Before and After Daily Communications Rate
Valley Blvd Before Valley Blvd After
Date
Communications
Rate Date
Communications
Rate
8/ 25/ 2005 99.7 11/ 20/ 2005 73.1
8/ 26/ 2005 99.5 11/ 21/ 2005 73.0
8/ 27/ 2005 99.5 11/ 22/ 2005 73.8
8/ 28/ 2005 99.8 11/ 23/ 2005 73.6
8/ 29/ 2005 99.6 11/ 24/ 2005 74.4
8/ 30/ 2005 99.8 11/ 25/ 2005 74.4
8/ 31/ 2005 99.8 11/ 26/ 2005 74.5
9/ 1/ 2005 99.9 11/ 27/ 2005 74.3
Average 99.7 73.9
Source: PeMS at http:// pems. eecs. berkeley. edu/
Baldwin Avenue Location
The Baldwin Avenue location did not have communications prior to the installation of the
ENCOM radios. Therefore, there is no data available for “ Before” analysis. As shown in
Figure 6, the communications rate in the “ after” period ranged between 0% and 82.1%.
There were two days where no samples were received, after which the radio recovered
( apparently with no intervention by Caltrans or ENCOM staff). Including these two days,
the average communications rate was 49.6%.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 21
After - % of Expected Samples
Baldwin Ave/ I- 10E
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
1/ 10/ 06 1/ 11/ 06 1/ 12/ 06 1/ 13/ 06 1/ 14/ 06 1/ 15/ 06 1/ 16/ 06 1/ 17/ 06
Date
% of Expected Samples
% of Expected Samples
Figure 6: Baldwin Ave/ I- 10E – Before Scenario Results
Table 2: Baldwin Ave After Daily Communications Rate
Baldwin Ave After
Date
Communications
Rate
1/ 10/ 2006 81.6
1/ 11/ 2006 82.1
1/ 12/ 2006 81.6
1/ 13/ 2006 81.9
1/ 14/ 2006 21.2
1/ 15/ 2006 0.0
1/ 16/ 2006 0.0
1/ 17/ 2006 48.6
Average 49.6
Source: PeMS at
http:// pems. eecs. berkeley. edu/
Madre Street Location
As shown in Figure 7 and Figure 8, the communication rate ( percentage of expected
samples) in the “ before” period ( copper interconnect) ranged between 99.6% and 99.9%
with an average of 99.8%. During the “ after” period ( with ENCOM wireless
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 22
communication in place), the communications rate ranged between 64.2 and 75.8% with
an average of 72.9%.
Before - % of Expected Samples
Madre St/ I- 210E
50.0
55.0
60.0
65.0
70.0
75.0
80.0
85.0
90.0
95.0
100.0
4/ 20/ 06 4/ 21/ 06 4/ 22/ 06 4/ 23/ 06 4/ 24/ 06 4/ 25/ 06 4/ 26/ 06 4/ 27/ 06
Date
% of Expected Samples
% of Expected Samples
Figure 7: Madre St/ I- 210 E – Before Scenario Results
After - % of Expected Samples
Madre St/ I- 210E
50.0
55.0
60.0
65.0
70.0
75.0
80.0
85.0
90.0
95.0
100.0
8/ 25/ 06 8/ 26/ 06 8/ 27/ 06 8/ 28/ 06 8/ 29/ 06 8/ 30/ 06 8/ 31/ 06 9/ 1/ 06
Date
% of Expected Samples
% of Expected Samples
Figure 8: Madre St/ I- 210 E – After Scenario Results
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 23
Table 3: Madre St– Before and After Daily Communications Rate
Madre St Before Madre St After
Date
Communications
Rate Date
Communications
Rate
4/ 20/ 2006 99.6 8/ 25/ 2006 73.8
4/ 21/ 2006 99.6 8/ 26/ 2006 64.2
4/ 22/ 2006 99.8 8/ 27/ 2006 75.3
4/ 23/ 2006 99.8 8/ 28/ 2006 75.2
4/ 24/ 2006 99.8 8/ 29/ 2006 75.1
4/ 25/ 2006 99.9 8/ 30/ 2006 74.1
4/ 26/ 2006 99.8 8/ 31/ 2006 75.8
4/ 27/ 2006 99.9 9/ 1/ 2006 69.8
Average 99.8 72.9
Source: PeMS at http:// pems. eecs. berkeley. edu/
Transition Period Comparison
Additional analysis was completed to understand how the communication rate (% of
expected samples) is affected during the transition to wireless communication. Figure 9
through Figure 11 and tables present these results.
Valley Boulevard Location
As shown in Figure 9, there was an interruption in communications at the Valley
Boulevard location between 10/ 27/ 2005 and 10/ 31/ 2005 which coincides with the time
that the ENCOM equipment was being installed. ( The operational date for ENCOM is
indicated in bold in the table).
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 24
Transition - % of Expected Samples
Valley Blvd/ I- 10E
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
10/ 25/ 05 10/ 27/ 05 10/ 29/ 05 10/ 31/ 05 11/ 2/ 05 11/ 4/ 05
Date
% of Expected Samples
% of Expected Samples
Figure 9: Valley Blvd/ I- 10 E – Transition Results
Table 4: Valley Blvd- Daily Communications Rate ( Transition Period)
Valley Blvd
Date Communications
Rate
10/ 25/ 05 75
10/ 26/ 05 65
10/ 27/ 05 0
10/ 28/ 05 0
10/ 29/ 05 0
10/ 30/ 05 0
10/ 31/ 05 0
11/ 1/ 05 44
11/ 2/ 05 72
11/ 3/ 05 74
11/ 4/ 05 75
11/ 5/ 05 74
Source: PeMS at
http:// pems. eecs. berkeley. edu/
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 25
Baldwin Avenue Location
As shown in Figure 10, there was no communication with the Baldwin Ave/ I- 10 E
location until 10/ 31/ 2005 which coincides with the approximate operational date of
ENCOM wireless at this location. ( The operational date for ENCOM is indicated in bold
in the table).
Transition - % of Expected Samples
Baldwin Ave/ I- 10E
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
10/ 28/ 05 10/ 29/ 05 10/ 30/ 05 10/ 31/ 05 11/ 1/ 05 11/ 2/ 05 11/ 3/ 05 11/ 4/ 05
Date
% of Expected Samples
% of Expected Samples
Figure 10: Baldwin Ave/ I- 10 E – Transition Results
Table 5: Baldwin Blvd- Daily Communications Rate ( Transition Period)
Baldwin Ave
Date Communications
Rate
10/ 28/ 05 0
10/ 29/ 05 0
10/ 30/ 05 0
10/ 31/ 05 0
11/ 1/ 05 49
11/ 2/ 05 77
11/ 3/ 05 79
11/ 4/ 05 79
Source: PeMS at
http:// pems. eecs. berkeley. edu/
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 26
Madre Street Location
Figure 11 indicates a drop in communication at Madre Street locations on 06/ 29/ 2006
wjocj coincides with the operational date of ENCOM wireless at this location (( The
operational date for ENCOM is indicated in bold in the table).
Transition - % of Expected Samples
Madre St/ I- 210E
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
6/ 25/ 06 6/ 26/ 06 6/ 27/ 06 6/ 28/ 06 6/ 29/ 06 6/ 30/ 06 7/ 1/ 06 7/ 2/ 06
Date
% of Expected Samples
% of Expected Samples
Figure 11: Madre St/ I- 210 E – Transition Results
Table 6: Madre St- Daily Communications Rate ( Transition Period)
Madre St
Date Communications
Rate
6/ 25/ 06 99.0
6/ 26/ 06 100.0
6/ 27/ 06 99.0
6/ 28/ 06 67.0
6/ 29/ 06 42.0
6/ 30/ 06 81.0
7/ 1/ 06 82.0
7/ 2/ 06 76.0
Source: PeMS at http:// pems. eecs. berkeley. edu/
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 27
24- hour period analysis
Figure 12 below illustrates communication data ( 3- hour averages) for a 24- hour period
within the below and after conditions at Madre St/ I210E location. It does not appear that
low light ( during night time) conditions have an impact on the communications rate on
either the hardwire connection or the ENCOM wireless application.
24- hour Communication - Madre St/ I- 210 E
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
3: 00 AM
6: 00 AM
9: 00 AM
12: 00 PM
3: 00 PM
6: 00 PM
9: 00 PM
12: 00 AM
Time ( hh: mm)
% of Expected Samples
Before 04/ 20/ 2006 3- hr average (%)
After 08/ 20/ 2006 3- hr average (%)
Figure 12: Madre Street/ I- 210E Hourly Communications Rate
Key Observations
Based on the above comparisons of the communications rate between the hardwire
connection and the ENCOM wireless connection, it appears that the communications
rate ( percentage of expected samples) drops to the vicinity of 75% to 80% ( compared to
99% with the hardwire connection). Lower communications rates could be attributed to
various causes:
· Radio could be using an improper driver. The driver contains the instructions on
how the radios should communicate with the device ( handshaking, tx, rx, etc.)
and the wrong driver could result in additional processing time. There are over
70 drivers available to allocate the needs of every traffic device ( e. g. controllers,
detectors, etc.) and ENCOM also creates custom ones as needed.
· There may be poor antenna alignment or a bad radio path. ENCOM radios come
with a Spectrum analyzer that shows in real time possible sources of interference
and the way to avoid them, they also have Remote Diagnostics tools that must
be used during installation to ensure the best radio path has been selected.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 28
The contractor for this installation is typically informed about the correct driver to use and
has experience with wireless installation. They did not request ENCOM help in trouble-shooting
the installations.
In general, an ENCOM wireless connection can be installed more quickly than a
traditional hardwire connection and with less disruption to traffic. While the radio may be
more expensive that a traditional copper FSK modem, utilizing an ENCOM wireless
radio may be more cost effective depending on the length of conduit and cable that is
being replaced. Assuming an installation cost of $ 50 per foot for conduit, the ENCOM
wireless solution could be cost effective at 130 feet, and perhaps even shorter if one
considered a reduced traffic control cost.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
December 2006- FINAL
Page 29
7. Recommendation to Caltrans
PROS CONS
Does not require trenching or directional
drilling for installation of conduit; avoids
traffic disruption due to conduit installation
Requires near line of sight between
antennas free of obstructions due to
buildings and vegetation.
May be less expensive in situations where
conduit installation is expensive or difficult
to install.
Additional ongoing troubleshooting/
equipment configuration may be required
over hardwire connections.
Can be installed more quickly than when
conduit installation is required; useful as a
temporary solution when hardwire
communication cables are broken or are
removed during construction.
Increased maintenance to trim vegetation
could be needed to maintain line of sight.
Uses RS232 and FSK protocols commonly
used by traffic controllers.
Line of sight could be blocked by future
buildings.
Utilizes license- free, low- power
frequencies for communications.
Antennas might attract unwanted attention
to cabinets; issues related to damage and
theft of equipment might arise.
Can handle point- to- point and point- to-multipoint
configurations.
Drilling holes in the cabinet walls could be
required for antenna cables; these holes
are additional location for dirt, dust and
moisture to enter cabinet. If ENCOM
equipment is relocated to another location,
these holes would need to be sealed.
Caltrans Pilot Project Evaluation | ENCOM WIRELESS
Appendix A
Vendor Specification Sheet
5510000 S0/ R
COMMPAK ™ Model 5100 S/ R Wireless Interconnect Unit
Features
• License- Free, Frequency- Hopping Spread
Spectrum Technology
• Up to 115kbps Sustained Data Throughput
• End- to- end Delays of less than 8 milliseconds
• 2 and 4 wire FSK interface ( Bell 202 / 1200 baud
only)
• Available as a Standalone Shelf Unit, Weatherproof
Pole Mount or 170/ TS1/ TS2 Detector Rack Card
• Up to 20 Mile Range ( with L. O. S.)
• Store and Forward Repeater Standard
• Full Duplex Capability
• Transparent Operation with Asynchronous
Traffic Applications
• High Performance Receiver
• Built- in Setup and Diagnostics Capabilities
• Variable Output Power Capability –
Maximum 1 Watt
• Completely Configurable with Windows ™ Based
ControlPAK ™ Software ( included)
• Compatible with the COMMPAK ™ Model 5200
Radiomodem products
Description
The COMMPAKTM 5100 has been specifically designed
to provide robust, reliable performance in Traffic
Interconnect Applications. Blazing throughput, extended
range and enhanced interference avoidance methods,
coupled with ease of setup and installation provide
unequalled performance in Point- to- Point or Point- to
Multipoint networks.
The Model 5100 may be operated as a Master, Remote
or Repeater. Configuration of the Model 5100 is simple
and straightforward, using the provided WindowsTM
based ControlPAKTM software. For standard traffic
interconnect applications, a wide range of prebuilt and
pretested application files are included, allowing “ plug-and-
play” setup for your specific controllers. Most major
controller manufacturer’s products and third party
applications are represented.
The Model 5100 provides a standard RS232 serial port,
as well as a 2 or 4 wire FSK interface. Store and Forward
Repeater capabilities for extending range beyond Line- of-
Sight are standard in the Model 5100.
The Model 5100 is available as a standalone shelf mount
unit, or as a card designed to plug into, and draw power
from a 170/ TS1/ TS2 detector rack. Field installation could
not be simpler!
With COMMPAKTM, Wireless is Simple!
Wireless Solutions for Traffic Monitoring and Control
TM
www. encomwireless. com
COMMPAKTM Model 5100 S/ R Specifications
Radio Specifications 900MHz 2.4GHz
Technology: FHSS1 FHSS1
Frequency Range: 902- 928 MHz 2.400- 2.4835 GHz
Output Power: 1mW, 10mW, 100mW, 1000mW 10, 50, 100, 250, 500, 750, 1000mW
Software Programmable: Yes Yes
Available Hop Patterns: 62 44
Number of RF Channels: 139 202
RF Channel Spacing: 200KHz 400KHz
Error Checking: 16 Bit- CRC 16 Bit- CRC
Error Correction: Forward Error Correction Forward Error Correction
Encryption: 32 Bit 32 Bit
Receiver Sensitivity / BER: - 110 dBm @ 10- 6 BER - 110 dBm @ 10- 6 BER
System Gain: 152 dBm 152 dBm
Antenna Port: 5100S RP TNC- F RP TNC- F
5100R RP SMA- F RP SMA- F
Certification: FCC, Industry Canada FCC, Industry Canada
Operating Modes: Transceiver Transceiver
System Configurations: Point to Point, Point to Multipoint, Multipoint to Point, Multipoint to Multipoint.
1Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum Technology
General Specifications 900MHz 2.4GHz
Input Power: 5100S 6- 30 VDC 6- 30 VDC
5100R Powered by the Detector Rack via the edge connector Powered by the Detector Rack via the edge connector
Power Consumption: Typical < 100mA ( standby), < 125mA ( 100mW TX)
Operating Environment: - 40 ˚ C to + 80 ˚ C (- 40 ˚ F to 176 ˚ F) - 40 ˚ C to + 80 ˚ C (- 40 ˚ F to 176 ˚ F)
Humidity: 95% Non- condensing 95% Non- condensing
Physical Dimensions: Shelf Mount ( 5100S) 2.00” W x 5.00” H x 9.00” D 2.00” W x 5.00” H x 9.00” D
Enclosure Type ( Shelf) Milled Aluminum Black Powder Coat Milled Aluminum Black Powder Coat
Rack Mount ( 5100R) 1.125” W x 4.50” H x 7.0” D 1.125” W x 4.50” H x 7.0” D
Detector Connector ( Rack) 2x22 pin edge card with 0.156” ctr. 2x22 pin edge card with 0.156” ctr.
Software Specifications 900MHz 2.4GHz
Radio Configuration: Yes Yes
Spectrum Analyzer: Yes Yes
Remote Diagnostics & Configuration Yes Yes:
Interface Specifications 900MHz 2.4GHz
Programming: DB9- F DB9- F
Data Interface: Standard RS232 Asynchronous RS232 Asynchronous
Optional 2 or 4 Wire FSK, Bell 202 2 or 4 Wire FSK, Bell 202
Data Format: Parity None, Odd or Even None, Odd or Even
Data Bits 7 or 8 7 or 8
Data Rate: RS232 1200 bps - 115.2 kbps 1200 bps - 115.2 kbps
FSK 1200 bps 1200 bps
Data Transmission: Key- by- data or RTS data input framing with Key- by- data or RTS data input framing with
programmable RTS/ CTS time delay programmable RTS/ CTS time delay
Indicators 900MHz 2.4GHz
TX Data, RX Data, PWR: Yes Yes
Data Port Indicator: Yes Yes
RSSI: Yes Yes
** ENCOM reserves the right to make changes to specifications of products described in this data sheet at any time without notice.
TM
ENCOM Wireless Data Solutions Inc.
# 7, 640 - 42 Avenue NE
Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2E 7J9
Phone ( 403) 230- 1122
Fax ( 403) 276- 9575
www. encomwireless. com
Rev # 02- 0203
Cut costs by
cutting out
the wires.
Save time with
simple set- up
and installation.
Enjoy secure
and reliable
communication.
Three great reasons to choose
products from ENCOM Wireless
Data Solutions Inc:
SERIAL RADIO 5200
Wireless Interconnect
The Model 5200 has been specifically designed to
provide robust, reliable performance for the transfer of
serial data. Blazing throughput, extended range and
enhanced interference avoidance methods, coupled
with ease of setup and installation provide unequalled
performance in Point- to- Point or Point- to Multipoint
networks.
Configuration of the Model 5200 is simple and
straight forward, using the provided ControlPAK ™
software. For standard traffic interconnect
applications, a wide range of prebuilt and pretested
application files are included, allowing plug- and- play
setup for your specific controllers. Most major
controller manufacturer’s products and third party
applications are represented.
The Model 5200 is fully compatible with the 5100
Series of Wireless Interconnect products, allowing
wireless network configurations that may include a
mix of RS232, RS485 and 2 or 4 wire FSK.
Store and Forward repeater capabilities for
extending range beyond Line- of- Sight are standard.
Features
• License- Free, Frequency- Hopping Spread
Spectrum Technology
• Up to 20 Mile Range ( with L. O. S.)
• Transparent Operation with most Traffic Applications
• High Performance Receiver
• Built- in Setup and Diagnostics Capabilities
• Built- in Store & Forward Repeater Capability
• Completely Configurable with Windows Based
ControlPAK ™ Software ( included)
5200 S 5200 R
CONTACT US
Street & Mailing Address
ENCOM Wireless Data Solutions Inc.
# 7, 640 - 42nd Ave NE
Calgary, Alberta T2E 7J9
Canada
Phone ( 403) 230- 1122
Toll- free Phone 1- 800- 617- 3487
Fax ( 403) 276- 9575
Email encom@ encomwireless. com
www. encomwireless. com
Model 5200 Specifications
Radio Specifications 900MHz 2.4GHz
Technology: FHSS1 FHSS1
Frequency Range: 902- 928 MHz 2.400- 2.4835 GHz
Output Power: 1mW, 10mW, 100mW, 1000mW 10, 50, 100, 250, 500, 750, 1000mW
Software Programmable: Yes Yes
Available Hop Patterns: 62 44
Number of RF Channels: 139 202
RF Channel Spacing: 200KHz 400KHz
Error Checking: 16 Bit- CRC 16 Bit- CRC
Error Correction: Forward Error Correction Forward Error Correction
Encryption: 32 Bit 32 Bit
Receiver Sensitivity / BER: - 110 dBm @ 10- 6 BER - 110 dBm @ 10- 6 BER
System Gain