GRIDLOCK AVOIDANCE SYSTEM GAS

1
GRIDLOCK AVOIDANCE SYSTEM
(GAS)

• Functional Specifications Briefing

2
Briefing Highlights

• Introduction
• Project Overview
• Background/ Project Objectives

• Functional Specs
• Schedule/Resources/ Budget
• Conclusion
• Questions

3
Introduction

• GAS intends to develop a computer-based
  simulation model to mimic the behavior of the
  Hampton Roads Interstate System south of Mercury
  Blvd. to Battlefield Blvd.

4
Overview
5
Overview

• Effective operation of the interstate highway
  system in Hampton Roads is an integral piece of
  the infrastructure and it is necessary for
  continued development of the area.
• We intend to provide transportation authorities
  and city planners with data results that describe
  the systems operations at current and at
  modified vehicle flows in two formats
  statistical and graphical.

6
Problems

• The average Driver wastes 41 hours behind the
  wheel on congested highways in Hampton Roads.
• Overall, the price of congestion to local drivers
  -- including time, fuel, and vehicle operating
  costs -- is 645.
  

7
Background
8
(No Transcript)
9
Objectives

• Provide transportation authorities and city
  planners with data results that describe the
  systems operations at current and at modified
  vehicle flows in two formats statistical and
  graphical.
• Demonstrate a small segment of the Hampton Roads
  interstate system through simulation for project
  validation and verification.
• Market the project on a consultant basis to other
  communities.
• Project completion by the end of the calendar
  year 2001.
• Software and hardware to be Y2K compliant.

10
Gridlock Avoidance System
Formatted traffic flow data
Output
11
Organization Structure
12
Functional Specs Can-Dos

• Produce a detailed, quantitative description of
  system performance for the present Hampton Roads
  Interstate Highway.
• Long-term lane closures (construction/repairs).
• Short-term lane closures (breakdowns/collisions).

13
Can-Dos (cont.)

• Addition of lanes/interchanges to current system.
• Addition of alternative routes to current system.
• Reaction of system to speed limit changes.
• System reaction to changes in vehicle mix
  (percentage of cars/trucks/commercial vehicles).

14
Can-Dos (cont.)

• Introduction of weather phenomena on system
  (bright sun at eye level during AM and PM hours).
• Introduction of weather changes on system. (snow,
  heavy rain, etc.).
• Introduction of seasonal phenomena to system
  (tourists, vacationers, etc.).

15
Functional Specs Cant Do

• Not a real-time system.
• Surface road traffic patterns not included.
• Individual lane change tendencies not included.
• Driver related attribute tendencies not included.
• System entering and exiting for individual
  vehicles at predetermined points is not
  illustrated.

16
Phase I

• Fall 1998
• Project Feasibility Presentation 11/98?
• Organizational Diagram 11/98?
• Cost/Resource Plan 11/98?
• Proposed Schedule 11/98?
• Milestones Presentation 11/98 ?
• Detailed Map of Hampton Roads
  Interstate Highway System 12/98?

17
Phase I

• Fall 1998 (cont.)
• Functional Specifications Document
  delivered 12/98?
• Initial Data gathered 12/98?
• Project Scope Determined 12/98?
• Approval Proofs of Concept
  Presentation 12/98?

18
Phase II

• Spring 1998
• Final Data for Demo
  gathered 1/99 15
• Select Demo highway
  segment 1/99 50
• Subcontract work for
  CS 300u and CS 250 1/99 40
• Preliminary Project
  Prototype Specifications 2/99 10

19
Phase II

• Spring 1999 (cont.)
• Project Home Page Demo 3/99 75
• Project Prototype Demo 4/99 5
• Grant Proposal Document
  delivered 4/99 5

20
Research, Development, and Implementation Phase
III

• Lease office space and
  begin operations 6/99
• Format and prepare data
  for simulator migration 6/99 - 6/00

21
Phase III (cont.)

• Unit Testing 1/00 - 12/00
• Unit Regression Testing 6/00 - 1/01
• System Testing 1/01 - 9/01
• System Regression Testing 9/01 - 12/01
• Project Delivery 12/01

22
Resources

• CS 300u
• Conduct survey of real-life traffic patterns.
• Marketing research to determine funding sources.
• CS 250
• Collect and format data for Statistical Analysis.
• Collect and format data for Simulator migration.

23
Resources (cont.)

• Dr.Leathrum (ODU - ECE)
• Dr.Overstreet (ODU - CS)
• Mr.DennisWatson (VDOT)
• Mr.GarlandCampbell (VDOT-
  Sr. Traffic Engineer)

24
Budget Personnel

• ODU Faculty Advisor (annual cost
  46,000) 115,000
• ODU Graduate Student workers
  (12 - 15 working 20
  hours per week at
  15 per hour) 450,000 Total Personnel
  Costs 565,000

25
Budget Office

• Office Space
  (annual cost 18,000) 45,000
• Office Furniture
  (annual cost 6,000) 15,000
• Office Supplies
  (annual cost 7200) 18,000 Total Office
  Costs 78,000

26
Budget Equipment

• Six Gateway E-5200 computers 15,600
• One AlphaServer 8200 5/625,
  UNIX, 2 CPU, 4 GB, 4.3 GB
  KFTHA
  Note Media and doc required for
  first system on site
  178,000
• One EISA Bridge
  2,000

27
Budget Equipment (cont.)

• Two PCI 3 port RAID controller
  w/4 MB cache
  Note If using 9 GB drives refer
  to SOC for significant
  restrictions 6,400
• Twenty-three 4.3 GB 7200 RPM
  Storage Works Ultra Wide Disk 27,000
• Three Storage Wide Shelf for
  8299 (SE, Single BUS) 4,300
• One PS/2 style Keyboard North
  American/English 100

28
Budget Equipment (cont.)

• One VT510, White, Low-emissions,
  US/Canada/Mexico 400
• One Power cord for 8200 100
• One Bulkhead assembly kit for
  KZPSC-BA 100
• Four 2.0 meter VHDCI male to
  VHCDI male cable 600
• Lexmark OPTRA 3455 network printer 2,600
• Hewlett-Packard OfficeJet Pro 1175C
  all-in-one printer 1,000

29
Budget Equipment (cont.)

• Statistical software package
  200
• Hewlett-Packard DeskJet 2500C
  Plotter
  9,400
• IBM Fast Ethernet LAN
  switch 1100
  1,900
• Evaluation Simulator Engines 4,300
  Total Equipment Costs
  254,000

30
Budget Total

• Total Personnel Costs
  565,000
• Total Office Costs 78,000
• Total Equipment Costs 254,000
• ODU Research Foundation 403,000
• Total Project Expenditures 1,300,000

31
Conclusion

• The biggest hurdle to overcome is a correct
  depiction of the current highway system. Through
  the development of our prototype, the extensive
  unit and system level testing, and the research
  data collected from organizations such as the
  Virginia Department of Transportation, (VDOT), we
  can deliver a reliable an effective tool to be
  used in the fight to overcome and eventually
  defeat Highway Gridlock in the Hampton Roads
  area.

32
Conclusion

• In order to avoid this threat we must act
  decisively and quickly. A weapon in our arsenal
  such as the GAS project could thwart any
  possibility of surrendering the area to gridlock
  forever.
• It will not only preserve our current lifestyle
  but work to better it in the future.

33
Conclusion

• The risk of gridlock capturing and holding
  Hampton Roads and many other cities for ransom
  throughout the United States is a real and
  identifiable threat.
• The Gridlock Avoidance System is a necessary tool
  to insure the stability of the infrastructure of
  the Hampton Roads area. The risks of not
  proceeding with the project far outweigh the
  risks of proceeding on schedule.

34
Conclusion

• 1,300,000 people in Hampton Roads
• 975,000 vehicles
• _at_645 per vehicle
• Total cost of not proceeding with GAS
• 
  
  629,000,000
• That is 1 vs. 483 for every person in Hampton
  Roads

1997 estimates from HamptonRoads.com
35
Conclusion

• Thank you for the opportunity to present our
  project to you and remember that a vote of
  confidence for the GAS project will allow
  Hampton Roads to continue to be a winner now and
  for future generations.