Smart Work Zone Subgroup

July 19, 2021

Purpose

This Subgroup will focus on adding optional objects and properties related to smart work zone data to the WZDx Specification. Specifically, the subgroup will be extending the existing static work zone information to include real-time metrics and various field devices related to smart work zones.

Agenda

• Greetings
• Last Meeting Summary
• Overview of MassDOT’s Vendor API Document
• Review of SWZ Data Elements
• Review of Activities and Milestones
• Action Items and Next Steps
  • Discussion of SWZ Data Elements
  • Listening Session (August 2, 2021 at 2PM)

Last Meeting Summary (Ben Acimovic)

• Discussion of Smart Work Zones (SWZs)
• Demo of MassDOT’s SWZM App
• Great discussion regarding suggested items to cover as part of the SWZ subgroup objectives

Overview of MassDOT's Smart Vendor API Document (Jacob Brady)

• Work Zone Project and Road Event definitions (modeled after current WZDx)
• Road Event Dynamic Metrics
• Field Device Configuration
  • Shared Details
  • Device Specific Details
• Field Device Data
  • Shared Details
  • DMS, VDS, CCTV

SWZ vendor API was built for MassDOT to capture the dynamic information identified as important data from existing SWZ deployments.

Review of SWZ Data Elements (led by Neil Boudreau and Todd Foster)

Define the field device and traffic metrics that should be collected in a uniform/consistent standardized form.

• Great discussion on ideas from the first meeting
• Several members sent follow up emails with their ideas
• Co-chairs consolidated the responses from members into categories:
  • Field Device
  • Traffic Metric
  • Field Device Status
  • Moving Vehicles
  • Undefined Category

The co-chairs reviewed what was documented from the first meeting and defined the field devices and traffic metrics that could be collected toaddress the needs of the majority of the members.

Review of Activities and Milestones (Ben Acimovic)

• Item 1: Hold Kick-Off meeting for the WZDx Smart Work Zones Subgroup – June 14, 2021 - COMPLETED
• Item 2: Use MassDOT Vendor API specification as the base for discussion and formation of a draft for the WZDx smart work zone and field device objects – July 19, 2021 – COMPLETED
• Item 2A: Listening Session on Monday, August 2, 2021 at 2PM
• Item 3: Revise draft smart work zone and field device objects and create GitHub issues for each new object – August 16, 2021
• Item 4: Create pull requests (PRs) from issues and group discussion which implement the desired new features supporting smart work zones and field devices – September 20, 2021
• Item 5: Finalize pull requests, perform QA/QC, and merge to the base smart work zones branch containing all the proposed changes related to smart work zones – October 18, 2021
• Item 6: Present all proposed changes related to smart work zones to WZDWG – October 28, 2021

Action Items and Next Steps (Ben Acimovic)

• Next Meetings
  • Listening Session on Monday, August 2, 2021 at 2PM
  • Meeting # 3, Monday, August 16, 2021 at 2PM
• Co-chairs to create GitHub issues for proposed road event-level changes and each new field device.
• Subgroup members will be notified once the issues are available.
• Subgroup members to comment via the issue discussion thread.

Discussion of SWZ Data Element (Neil Boudreau and Ben Acimovic)

Ross Sheckler – Brought up striping truck and portable rumble strips. Specific activity versus what repair is being completed. This maybe best to capture at a higher level. These itmes are “in place” as part of the traffic control.

Sinclair Stolle – Mentioned adding in video URL in addition to the still image URL. Adding in still image URL is not complex. The co-chairs want to make things work for as many of the 50 states as possible.

Jeremy Agulnek – Safety Service Patrols are more of an incident management function.

Tony Leingang – On the SSP, the message is "Move Over or Slow Down" in our state

Robert Hoyler – Regarding SSP, an important benefit could be the timely visibility of unplanned incidents, whether on the shoulder (slow down & move over awareness), or when a lane is actually blocked (such as in a crash situation).

Tony Leingang - As an aside, we are also having the conversation with the Washington State Patrol similar to the WSDOT Incident Response (SSP) vehicles. They have interest in similar messaging when patrol cars are stopped on the shoulder or blocking lanes to bring awareness to incident work zone activities.

Vinod Chandran – Operational piece, can there be an enumerated field that provides information on what is going on? Paint truck can be a type of device. The API piece is important, may want to consider a lite API for what the car companies want to consume and an all-consuming API for the DOTs. If the specification gets too large it will be hard to consume.

Ross Sheckler – CVs are coming, these definitely need to be considered now or in one of the earlier rounds. Queue warning system is covered as a traffic metric. In the interest of circumscribing this effort can we say we are focused on queue warning?

Jacob Brady – Clarified that the current WZDx does have real time data. It is static data that is updated at regular intervals. For example, you can be polling an arrow board every minute to determine if it is on or off. The purpose of this subgroup is to expand the WZDx so that is can be used more dynamically.

Will Sisk – two points, 1. Camera streaming feed for a consumer is not a concern, but for a producer, bandwidth is a concern. How it is handled on a fiber vs cellular network can be very different. 2. Definitions for sensors appear to be focused on side fire lane by lane radar. There are simpler solutions with doppler. Doppler radar only gives speed, not occupancy and volume. Response: the category would encapsulate all sensors, min amount of information with additional information being optional.

Tony Leingang – WSDOT has a grant to transmit temporary data within an incident, not completed yet. Temporary incident related information from a PVMS, such as “move over”, “slow down”, “crash ahead”, is important to know. Trigger from a location to provide a response. For awareness, Washington's WZDx demonstration grant was predicated on using the application in incident reporting. Our proof of concept will be in testing those incident messages. Response: What use case is this supporting?

Russ Holt – CV is coming, should think about taking into consideration in this round. I'd have to guess vast majority of these items have been suggested or asked by folks to date because they are thinking forward to CAVs and how points of data just might contribute to SAFETY in some way shape or form. I can understand if/how/why co-chairs want to take baby steps, with imminent focus only IP-addressable field TTC & other traditional types of ITS devices

Pete Krikelis – Is there any thought on showing the Level Of Service of the Highway?

Maaza Mekuria – Use Cost for managed lane, time period

Maaza Mekuria – I think presence of a roving work-zone is vehicle is important. It would be good to know the lane being used especially if it is restricted into a single lane.

Jacob Brady – It is important to note, many properties would be optional. The intent is for it to be as easy to implement as possible.

James Cullins - The more safety alerts drivers get the better to more over or slow down.

Russ Holt - devil's advocate closing point: If a Work Zone really wants to call itself "smart" and be supportive of the FHWA original basis for these efforts, WZDx specs should not be bashful for being open to real-time data/input from almost everything noted by others to date. Thx for the efforts team

Attendees

• State of Colorado – Benjamin Acimovic*
• Ver-Mac – Todd Foster*
• Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Neil Boudreau*
• Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Carrie McInerney
• Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Corey O’Connor
• Haas Alert – Jeremy Agulnek
• Navjoy – Justin Healey
• Navjoy, Inc. – Vinod Chandran
• Navjoy – Navin Nageli
• CeVe – David Aylesworth
• Hawaii DOT – Maaza Mekuria
• Hillsborough County – James Cullins
• Hillsborough County – Amos Castillo
• Hill and Smith – Pete Krikelis
• QLynx Technologies – Will Sisk
• Google – Eric Kolb
• Iowa DOT – Dan Sprengeler
• Iowa DOT – Sinclair Stolle
• Illinois DOT - Peter Stresino
• Illinois DOT – Juan Pava
• Illinois DOT – Alec Paoni
• Kyra Solutions – Satyam Patel
• ATSSA – Donna Clark
• iCone Products LLC – Ross Sheckler
• Wisconsin DOT – Erin Schwark
• PA Turnpike – Christopher Parker
• PA Turnpike – Albert Brulo
• TomTom – Robert Hoyler
• WSDOT – Tony Leingang
• WSDOT – Steve Haapala
• Rhode Island DOT – Russell Holt
• Indiana DOT – Mischa Kachler
• TxDOT – Jianming Ma
• Minnesota Department of Transportation – Michelle Moser
• Austin Transportation Department – Luke Urie
• The Sanborn Map Company, Inc. – John Copple
• Utah Department of Transportation – Chuck Felice
• QLynx Technologies – Devorah Henderson
• Volpe – Hadrian Merced Hernandez
• Volpe – Nate Deshmuckh-Towery
• Volpe – Mark Mockett
• Booz Allen Hamilton – Mahsa Ettefagh
• IBI Group – Jacob Brady
• IBI Group – Michelle Boucher
• *Smart Work Zone Subgroup co-chair