Details:

Creators:
Saito, Mitsuru ; Sanchez, Gregory H. ; Schultz, Grant G.
Saito, Mitsuru ; Sanchez, Gregory H. ; Schultz, Grant G. Less -
Corporate Creators:
Brigham Young University. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Corporate Contributors:
Utah Dept. of Transportation
Subject/TRT Terms:
[+]
85th Percentile Speed Accuracy Approach Approach Speed Free Flow Speeds Sensors Signal Performance Metrics Speed Volume Wavetronix SmartSensor Advance
Publication/ Report Number:
UT- 16.05
Resource Type:
Tech Report
Geographical Coverage:
Utah
Corporate Publisher:
Utah. Dept. of Transportation. Research Division
Abstract:
This study evaluated the accuracy of approach volumes and free flow approach speeds collected by the Wavetronix

SmartSensor Advance sensor for the Signal Performance Metrics system of the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT),

using the field data collected by JAMAR counter boards for free flow approach volumes and a TruCam LiDAR gun for approach

speeds. The Advance sensor is primarily designed for dilemma zone reduction. It does not have the capability to differentiate

vehicles between lanes, but the Advance sensor currently used has a detection range of up to 600 ft. and has the capability to

track vehicles approaching the intersection. UDOT wanted to use this capability to get added values from their investment in the

Advance sensors. The approach volume accuracy was analyzed with three factors: sensor position, number of approach lanes, and

approach volume level. The results showed that the high accuracy is achieved when the number of approach lanes is low, or

closer to one-lane, and the approach volume level is low. The overall range of accuracy for the approach volume counts was

found to range from approximately 77.8% (22.2% undercount) to 105.7% (5.7% overcount). The accuracy of approach speeds

was analyzed with two factors: the number of lanes and offset position of the lanes relative to the location of the speed gun. The

offset position was first tested and found not to affect the accuracy of approach speeds. In general, the difference in means was

approximately ±2 mph and was not considered practically significant. The 85th percentile speed for sites with more than 50

samples were then evaluated. For these sites, the average difference in 85th percentile speed was -0.43 mph, the biggest negative

difference being -1.6 mph, and the biggest positive difference being 1.5 mph. A Bootstrapping analysis was then performed to

predict the expected distribution of speed differences in 85th percentile speeds. This analysis also showed the 85th percentile

speeds by the LiDAR gun and the Advance sensor were not significantly different for practical traffic engineering applications.


Format:
PDF
Funding:
14-8290
Collection(s):
US Transportation Collection
Main Document Checksum:
[+]
urn:sha256:fa8412d75e3f6b6dc41b82ef632c8885a6a2391c67241789dd6724349bb2fd66
Download URL:
https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/30839/dot_30839_DS1.pdf
File Type:

Supporting Files

• No Additional Files

More +