Implementation and Evaluation of the Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Final Report

Prepared by:

Daniel M. Nelson, AICP AECOM

February 2017

Published by:

Minnesota Department of Transportation Research Services & Library

395 John Ireland Boulevard, MS 330 St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-1899

This report represents the results of research conducted by the authors and does not necessarily represent the views or policies of the Minnesota Department of Transportation and/or (author’s organization). This report does not contain a standard or specified technique.

The authors and the Minnesota Department of Transportation and AECOM do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to this report

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors of this report wish to acknowledge the very helpful efforts of several MnDOT and Department of Public Safety staff that provided their insight and resources to assist in the completion of this Innovative Idea project, including MnDOT Project Manager Rashmi Brewer, Minnesota State Patrol Major Bruce Brynell, Minnesota State Patrol Lt. Bob Zak, Minnesota State Trooper Scott Rudeen, Minnesota State Patrol Lt. Denise Lien, Minnesota State Patrol Lt. Colonel Rochelle Schrofer, and MnDOT OCIC Work Zone Safety Supervisor Ted Ulven. This report also acknowledges the valuable contributions from MnDOT Work Zone Safety Coordinator Craig Mittelstadt, who passed away in the summer of 2015.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Purpose ..................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Project Background ............................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Operational Needs ................................................................................................................. 1

1.4 Project Description................................................................................................................ 3

Chapter 2: Systems Engineering for ITS Process ........................................................................... 4

2.1 MnDOT Statewide Regional ITS Architecture and ITS Development Objectives .............. 5

2.2 Systems Engineering Documents ......................................................................................... 6

Chapter 3: ESC4WZ System Equipment and Operational Testing ................................................ 8

3.1 ESC4WZ Field Equipment ................................................................................................... 8

3.2 Software Interface ................................................................................................................. 9

3.3 Planning and Deployment Project Stages ........................................................................... 12

3.3.1 Work Zone Coordination and Planning for System Installation .................................. 12

3.3.2 April - May: Work Zone Coordination and Planning for Installation ......................... 13

3.3.3 Work Zone Coordination and Planning for System Installation .................................. 15

3.3.4 MSP Testing Period 1: Week of July 25th .................................................................... 17

3.3.5 MSP Testing Period 2: Week of August 8th ................................................................. 18

3.3.6 MSP Testing Periods 3 and 4: Weeks of August 29th and Sept. 12th ........................... 19

3.3.7 System Operations October – November 2016 ........................................................... 20

Chapter 4: ESC4WZ System Evaluation ...................................................................................... 22

4.1 System Validation Process .................................................................................................. 22

4.2 System Validation Results .................................................................................................. 23

4.2.1 MOE #1 – Assessment of Enhanced Speed Compliance............................................. 23

4.2.2 MOE #2 – Enhance Safety of Speed Enforcement ...................................................... 26

4.2.3 MOE #3 – Enhance the Efficiency of Speed Detection ............................................... 27

4.2.4 MOE #4 – Provide Performance Metrics for Analysis ................................................ 27

4.3 System Validation Results .................................................................................................. 28

Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................................................... 33

5.1 Conclusions ......................................................................................................................... 33

5.2 Lessons Learned and Considerations for Future Installation .............................................. 34

5.2.1 Integration of System Placement with Work Zone Traffic Management Plan ............ 34

5.2.2 System Component Modifications ............................................................................... 36

5.3 Recommendations for Future Installation and Cost Estimates ........................................... 37

5.3.1 Develop Procedures for System Incorporation into Work Zone Design ..................... 37

5.3.2 Perform System Modifications .................................................................................... 37

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 General Problems and Operational Needs. .................................................................... 2

Figure 1.2 ESC4WZ System Overview .......................................................................................... 3

Figure 2.1 Systems Engineering V-Diagram. ................................................................................. 4

Figure 3.1 ESC4WZ Field Equipment and Cabinet Components .................................................. 9

Figure 3.2 Software Interface (Main Screen) ............................................................................... 10

Figure 3.3 Software Interface (Violation Review Screen)............................................................ 11

Figure 3.4 Image of Software Interface in MSP Vehicle.............................................................. 12

Figure 3.5 Overview of ESC4WZ System Location in I-35E Work Zone ................................... 14

Figure 3.6 ESC4WZ System Location (View from County Road J Looking South) ................... 14

Figure 3.7 Sample Summary of Speed Limit Violations .............................................................. 16

Figure 3.8 Observation Form for MSP in Use of the ESC4WZ System ...................................... 17

Figure 4.1 Total Count of Vehicles Traveling Above Trigger Speed (75 MPH) during Speed Enforcement Time Periods with MSP Parked North of County Road J ....................................... 24

Figure 4.2 Total Count of Vehicles Traveling Above Trigger Speed (75 MPH) during Speed Enforcement Time Periods with MSP Parked South of County Road J ....................................... 25

Figure 4.3 Total Count of Vehicles Traveling Above Trigger Speed (75 MPH) during Speed Enforcement Time Periods with MSP Parked North of County Road J ....................................... 26

Figure 4.4 Total Count of Vehicles Traveling Above Trigger Speed Value (75 MPH) during Week of Aug. 1st ........................................................................................................................... 28

Figure 4.5 Results of 95% Statistical Significance Test on Vehicle Samples .............................. 32

Figure 5.1 Summary of Conclusions on ESC4WZ System .......................................................... 33

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Rule 940 Requirements ................................................................................................... 5

Table 2.2 Minnesota ITS Development Objectives Related to ESC4WZ System ......................... 6

Table 2.3 Systems Engineering Documents ................................................................................... 7

Table 3.1 System Component Model Numbers and Detail ............................................................ 8

Table 3.2 System Installation and Operation Timeline ................................................................ 21

Table 4.1 Validation Plan Measures of Effectiveness .................................................................. 22

Table 4.2 Speed Validation for Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zone ............................ 29

Table 5.1 Cost Estimate to Re-Enable System for Future MnDOT Work Zone .......................... 38

Table 5.2 Cost Estimate to Re-Enable and Enhance System for Future MnDOT Work Zone..... 38

Table 5.3 Cost Estimate to Procure Additional System for Additional MnDOT Work Zone ...... 39

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This project report details the design, development, deployment, testing and evaluation of the Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System that was installed along side of an Interstate 35E work zone near White Bear Lake, MN. The purpose of this project was to deploy, test and evaluate a mobile system that could be used by Minnesota State Patrol (MSP) officers to safely conduct manual on-site speed enforcement in work zones. The benefits for this project include: improve officer safety during speed violation enforcement outside of the work zone; enhance work zone safety for roadway workers and travelers; demonstrate an enforcement approach consistent with existing state law; demonstrate and document findings of system use and portability, ease of setup and an intuitive user interface.

MnDOT selected AECOM and Image Sensing Systems (ISS) as the Project Consultant Team under the Innovative Idea Program in June 2014 to plan for and install the ESC4WZ System. AECOM utilized the Systems Engineering process to guide the project through the concept, design, installation, and evaluation stages. ISS provided the system hardware components (i.e. Autoscope Duo unit) and coordinated with the software interface designer – Iron Mountain Systems – to configure and install the system which consisted of a camera / radar device to detect vehicle speeds in the work zone, as well as a cellular modem to communicate the data to MSP staff that could remotely view the software interface. The system was installed in June 2016 and MSP staff utilized the system for speed enforcement during multiple one-week periods in July, August, and September 2016.

It should be noted that while the ESC4WZ System provided MSP with an advance notification about speed limit violations, the system did not replace the current speed limit enforcement procedures required by law in issuing a speeding citation. The system is designed to support these existing procedures by providing an advance notification of oncoming speed limit violators and increase the confidence level of MSP in performing speed limit enforcement in confined locations with limited sight distance.

AECOM performed a quantitative evaluation on the data obtained by the ESC4WZ system between July 2016 and September 2016, and also gathered qualitative comments from MSP through email and field visits to the site. Three key findings of the evaluation are summarized below:

1. Accurate advance notification of vehicles – The ESC4WZ System provided MSP with an accurate advance notification of vehicles traveling in excess of the posted work zone speed limit.

2. An increase in work zone speed compliance was observed during initial stages of the project, but subsequent periods of the evaluation detected decreases in compliance. These periods were likely influenced by the lack of a safe parking location for MSP to perform effective speed enforcement, as well as, an unexpected change in the posted work zone speed limit from 55 to 60 MPH on Sept. 1st.

3. System location within the work zone should be planned at the work zone design stage by MnDOT, so that system placement in relation to MSP parking location can be designed in the safest and most efficient manner possible. Diamond interchanges near the end of

the work zone are envisioned to be the most optimal location for system installation and operation.

The biggest challenge encountered on the project by the AECOM team was properly placing the ESC4WZ System in a field location that provided MSP with a safe and efficient location at which to perform speed enforcement. Through meetings with the work zone contractor, a location was chosen that was believed to have provided MSP with a safe location for parking. Through field reviews conducted with MSP on July 29th and August 12th, 2016, an alternate parking location was requested to improve the overall safety of speed enforcement. However, existing work zone activities prohibited the effective use of the system in the requested alternate parking location.

Despite these challenges, MSP provided positive feedback on how the system allowed them to safely and effectively perform speed enforcement in the work zone location. Comments were provided by MSP to AECOM on daily observations of how the system operated and allowed for enhanced speed enforcement. Multiple MSP staff reported positive feedback on how the system operated in the field, in addition to recommendations on improving the safety of speed enforcement through safer parking locations for MSP. Project interviews with MSP staff also indicated a desire to work with the ESC4WZ system in future work zones provided that the safety aspects can be addressed through additional work zone planning.

Through the overall project, the following advantages and limitations were observed:

System Advantages System Limitations

1. Advance notice – Provides advance notice of speed violations to MSP to enhance speed enforcement procedures in confined and limited sight distance conditions

1. Image Quality – Camera does not provide very high resolution imagery given cellular modem and bandwidth limitations

2. Data Analysis – Allows for data analysis on number of speed violations above various thresholds to assess the impact of MSP presence

2. System Placement– With ever-changing work zone conditions due to the nature of construction this system would benefit by being incorporated at the work zone planning / design stages to ensure safe placement and sight distance for MSP and ESC4WZ system.

3. System Portability / Maintenance – Low amount of hardware maintenance; can be re-located to other work zone or speed enforcement sites as needed

3. System Battery Re-Charging – Solar panel batteries require re-charging every three weeks; source of fixed power desirable for the system

Given the overall positive performance of the ESC4WZ system on the project, the following next steps are envisioned for future system installations:

1. Develop Procedures for Work Zone Traffic Management Planning – These procedures can guide MnDOT work zone designers in planning and/or choosing the most optimal location for system placement that provides MSP with a safe location for speed enforcement within or at the end of the work zone.

2. System Upgrade for Solar Operations – An additional component should be added to the system cabinet to help regulate the amount of voltage provided to system components.

3. System Camera / Interface Upgrade – The existing camera could be configured to provide a higher resolution image to improve confidence in the system. The system interface could also be updated to present a near real-time summary of violations occurring over the past week(s) of time to allow MSP an ability to effectively schedule shifts for speed enforcement.

These steps are described in further detail in Section 5 of this report, along with a summary of the project team’s estimated costs to accomplish these steps for future construction seasons. It should be noted that these costs are only estimated for consideration by MnDOT in planning for any potential future deployment of the ESC4WZ system in additional MnDOT work zones.

1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

This final report details the design, deployment, testing and evaluation of the Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System that has been installed along side of an Interstate 35E work zone near White Bear Lake, MN.

1.1 Project Purpose

Speed enforcement in work zones becomes difficult by constrained areas that do not allow for safe staging of Minnesota State Patrol (MSP) vehicles to perform speed enforcement. The purpose of this project is to implement and test a mobile work zone speed enforcement tool to support enhanced speed compliance and for future speed enforcement in work zones or other geometrically constrained roadway areas which do not provide safe staging for MSP vehicles, nor allow for the safe stopping of a vehicle to issue citations / warnings by law enforcement.

In addition, the ESC4WZ System can be used to collect performance measures, help MSP officers determine days and times for targeted speed enforcement, and assess the effectiveness of their presence in a work zone for enforcement purposes to improve speed compliance. The system can also be used to measure the impacts of other countermeasures that may be implemented by MnDOT and MSP in an effort to enhance work zone speed compliance and safety.

1.2 Project Background

The ESC4WZ System was submitted as a proposal in response to a MnDOT solicitation under the Innovative Idea program. A detailed proposal was submitted by AECOM (and sub-contractor Image Sensing Systems) to MnDOT on June 3rd, 2014 as part of Stage II of the program that illustrated the plan to install the ESC4WZ System. The use of the Systems Engineering (SE) process for Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) was followed to guide the project through the concept, design, installation, testing, and evaluation stages of the project.

AECOM was able to build upon a previous demonstration of an Enhanced Red Light Enforcement system in which Iron Mountain Systems developed a software interface to be utilized by MSP.

1.3 Operational Needs

The operational needs for the ESC4WZ System are summarized with respect to each of the general problems noted in Figure 1.1 on the following page.

It should be noted that while the ESC4WZ System can provide MSP with an advance notification about potential speed limit violations, the system is not intended to replace the current procedures of speed limit enforcement, or is it to be used as the basis in issuing a speeding citation. Current Minnesota state law and statutes (MN 169.14, Subd. 10) define the procedures that govern how speed limit enforcement is performed by MSP in such a manner that the citation can be defensible in the court system in the event that the citation is challenged.

2

General Problems Operational Needs 1. Speeding and speed differentials

contribute to higher crash frequency and greater severity of crash-related injuries

1. Deploy a speed detection system that can identify multiple approaching vehicles from one location

2. Difficult to enforce speeds within work zones

2. Deploy a system that is mobile and can be moved to an optimal location that allows for MSP to safely enforce speeds near the work zone.

3. Safety concerns for enforcement staff

3. Deploy a system that allows for viewing and assessing vehicle travel speeds by law enforcement that are parked outside of the work zone

4. Lack of speed compliance and speed reduction in work zones that is addressed with presence of law enforcement as a speed deterrent

4. Deploy a system that allows law enforcement to be present near the work zone to visually estimate and identify the target speed violator, then receive speed information to verify the speeds of oncoming vehicles

5. State law prohibits automated photo speed enforcement

5. Deploy a system that can be easily modified based on lessons learned during the course of demonstration and utilized in the event that Minnesota state law and/or State Statutes change to allow for the use of the system as a tool for speed enforcement.

Figure 1.1 General Problems and Operational Needs.

MSP has summarized the procedures they follow in performing speed enforcement as V.A.S.T. (Visual, Audio, Speed, Targeted) procedures and described in further detail below:

1. Trooper needs to visually make contact with a vehicle that is believed to be traveling above the speed limit. It should be noted that all troopers are extensively trained on detecting speeding vehicles from long distances as part of speed enforcement training.

2. Trooper also listens to the audio provided by the radar unit for the strongest signal to verify that the visually sighted approaching vehicle is the fastest moving vehicle.

3. Trooper then activates the radar unit to provide a speed value in MPH that is assigned to the approaching speeding vehicle for potential citation purposes.

4. Trooper finally confirms that the visually identified speeding vehicle has been targeted from the beginning point of visual detection through to the point of passing the trooper on the roadway. Trooper then determines to enforce the speed limit.

In the event that a speeding citation is challenged in court, the trooper issuing the citation is called to testify to how these procedures were followed. In addition, the radar speed gun may be questioned as to how it was properly tuned, and how the unit went through critical performance testing, among other questions from defense attorneys. In short, the trooper needs to be 100% certain that the speeding citation was issued lawfully under the current statute (169.14, Subd. 10) as part of testifying under oath in court. Any hesitations in answering questions could be

3

construed by a judge as uncertainty, and thus, lead to invalidation of the citation, in addition to potential damage to the Trooper’s credibility in future court proceedings.

The ESC4WZ system can support MSP in the performance of these procedures by giving an advance notification about vehicles in excess of the speed limit and help to increase the confidence level of Troopers in issuing speeding citations, especially in constrained limited sight distance locations. The use of the system over time by MSP may also lead to discussions about how state law and statutes could be amended to allow for use of the system in issuing speeding citations. Although modification of state statutes is not a goal of this project, the ESC4WZ system could potentially demonstrate ways in which the statutes could be modified to allow for the use of photos / videos captured by the system to support court challenges of speeding citations issued by MSP.

1.4 Project Description

Field equipment includes a mobile trailer on which the ESC4WZ System was installed to detect the speeds of vehicles within work zones. An electronics enclosure on the trailer housed an embedded processor on which the system intelligence was installed. In addition, the enclosure also housed a device that connects to the sensor mounted on the pole for retrieving radar and video information. The sensor was mounted at a sufficient height above the enclosure to view and detect vehicle speeds that are traveling through the work zone. The mobile trailer was placed at an optimal location that allows for MSP to view areas where vehicles frequently exceed the speed limit. Live data measured by the system on the mobile trailer was sent via cellular communications through a 3G/4G modem and was accessed by mobile computers within MSP vehicles that have a cellular data connection. Figure 1.2 contains an illustration of the field elements within the system.

Figure 1.2 ESC4WZ System Overview

4

CHAPTER 2: SYSTEMS ENGINEERING FOR ITS PROCESS

This Chapter describes the Systems Engineering for ITS process that was followed in planning, designing, installing, and testing the ESC4WZ System. This process is required by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), which helps to guide ITS implementations, such as the ESC4WZ System, by involving stakeholders early and developing their ideas before high-level and detailed design activities are conducted. This interdisciplinary approach assures that the ultimate design and implementation of the system reflects this early input. The Systems Engineering “V” Diagram is provided in Figure 2.1 below.

Figure 2.1 Systems Engineering V-Diagram.

Systems Engineering integrates all the disciplines and specialty groups into a team effort forming a structured development process that proceeds from system concept to implementation and operation. Systems Engineering considers both the business and the technical needs of all customers with the goal of providing a quality product that meets the user needs.

The Systems Engineering process is used to identify a project’s needs and constraints and lay out the activities, resources, budget, and timeline for the project. A critical part of the process is to build consensus among the stakeholders of the project. The process is applicable at all stages of a project, from initial system planning through final operations and maintenance of the system.

FHWA Federal Rule 940, Intelligent Transportation Systems Architecture and Standards, which implements Section 5206 (e) of the Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century (TEA – 21), requires agencies implementing projects with ITS elements utilizing federal funds to develop regional architectures and adopt a Systems Engineering approach for project deployments in

5

order to qualify for ITS funding. Table 2.1 illustrates the relationship between the various steps of the SE process and Rule 940.

Table 2.1 Rule 940 Requirements

Systems Engineering Process Steps

Corresponding Rule 940 Requirements

Concept of Operations

• Identification of participating agencies roles and responsibilities

• Procedures and resources necessary for operations and management of the system

System Requirements: High-Level and Detailed • Requirements definitions

Design: High-Level and Detailed

• Identification of portions of the regional ITS architecture being implemented

• Analysis of alternative system configurations and technology options to meet requirements

• Procurement options • Identification of applicable ITS standards and testing

procedures

2.1 MnDOT Statewide Regional ITS Architecture and ITS Development Objectives

MnDOT has developed a Statewide Regional ITS Architecture that provides the base for all ITS projects illustrated in the Systems Engineering diagram in Figure 2.1. With the recent update of the MnDOT Statewide Regional ITS Architecture in 2013-2014, MnDOT’s ITS Development Objectives were refined to better align with Minnesota’s ITS needs and be more consistent with the National ITS Architecture.

The Minnesota ITS Development Objectives presented in Table 2.2 are those that could be met with the ESC4WZ System. The goal of the Minnesota ITS Development Objectives is to enhance transportation through the safe and efficient movement of people, goods, and information, with greater mobility, fuel efficiency, less pollution and increased operating efficiency statewide. These Objectives are rooted in the overall Minnesota GO Transportation Plan that defines MnDOT’s vision for transportation and guiding principles and outlines strategies to satisfy its vision and mission. The 20-Year Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan (SMTP) further clarifies these strategies and lays out actions to implement the strategies. The Minnesota ITS Development Objectives then further establish the specific objectives that can be achieved through implementing ITS countermeasures, such as the ESC4WZ System.

6

Table 2.2 Minnesota ITS Development Objectives Related to ESC4WZ System

A. Improve the Safety of the State's Transportation System A-1 – Reduce crash frequency

A-1-12 Reduce number of crashes due to excessive speeding A-1-14 Reduce number of crashes related to driver inattention and distraction

A-2 – Reduce fatalities and life changing injuries A-2-13 Reduce number of fatalities due to excessive speeding A-2-15 Reduce number of fatalities related to driver inattention and distraction A-2-34 Reduce number of injuries due to excessive speeding A-2-36 Reduce number of injuries related to driver inattention and distraction A-2-43 Reduce number of speed violations

A-3 – Reduce crashes in work zones A-3-01 Reduce number of crashes in work zones A-3-02 Reduce number of fatalities in work zones A-3-03 Reduce number of motorist injuries in work zones A-3-04 Reduce number of workers injured by vehicles in work zones

B. Increase Operational Efficiency and Reliability of the Transportation System B-2 – Increase average vehicle occupancy and facility throughput

B-2-24 Increase AM/PM peak hour vehicle throughput on specified routes B-2-25 Increase AM/PM peak hour person throughput on specified routes

2.2 Systems Engineering Documents

The documents developed by the AECOM team for MnDOT are listed and described in Table 2.3 below. Documents were shared with MnDOT team members and updated based on input and feedback from team members. Final versions of the documents have been produced and shared with MnDOT.

7

Table 2.3 Systems Engineering Documents

Systems Engineering Documents Purpose/Description Deliverables

Project Plan Describes all of the tasks that need to be performed to accomplish the project. January 2015

System Engineering Management Plan (SEMP)

Addresses project controls that are to be developed and implemented throughout the project and documents the technical processes to be used.

January 2015

Concept of Operations Describes how the system will operate and outlines the roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder. March 2015

System Requirements and Design

Describes what the system will do and how its components will function at a high level. Also includes the development of high-level design documents and detailed design plans including shop drawings and specifications of the proposed system

June 2015

Verification and Validation Plan

Defines the step by step procedures to conduct verifications that components meet system requirements. Describes how the goals and objectives of the system (identified in the ConOps) will be measured

June 2016

Acceptance Testing and Evaluation Plans

Documents the detailed procedures to be used to verify and validate the deployed ESC4WZ System. June 2016

Final Project Report

Provides overall summary of activity and the recommendations for MnDOT on next steps that could be taken. Includes results measured during the Acceptance Testing and Evaluation stages of the project, as well as results from the Validation stage of the project.

February 2017

8

CHAPTER 3: ESC4WZ SYSTEM EQUIPMENT AND OPERATIONAL TESTING

A summary of the system components and quantities to be provided by the AECOM Team and installed is presented in Table 3.1. Refer to Appendix A of this document for datasheets on the various system components with more detailed information.

Table 3.1 System Component Model Numbers and Detail

System Components Unit Type Quantity Notes Autoscope Duo Unit (Includes Duo Interface Panel and Duo Detection Module)

Autoscope Duo 1

Refer to Appendix A for datasheet with detailed component data

ARIES Field Processor CompuLab IPC2 1 Software GUI Customized 1 3G/4G Modem Verizon Wireless 1

3-Port Switch Cyber Data 3-Port Gigabit Ethernet Switch

1

Trailer Trafcon LX-PEP 1

3.1 ESC4WZ Field Equipment

The ESC4WZ system is pictured in Figure 3.1 as it was installed in the field on the northbound side of I-35 E near County Road J. The Autoscope Duo unit (radar and camera) connect via Ethernet cables into a cabinet on the trailer as pictured in Figure 3.1. The height of the Autoscope Duo was approximately 20 above the ground from where the trailer was placed. The arm of the trailer on which the Autoscope Duo was installed was adjustable to the proper height at which the device could most optimally detect the speed of oncoming vehicles along I-35E.

Prior to installation, the Autoscope Duo unit was tested in conjunction with a field processor (provided by Iron Mountain Systems) that was installed inside the cabinet on the trailer. The purpose of the testing was to confirm that the two streams of data coming in from the Autoscope Duo unit (video and radar speed data) were properly being interpreted and presented on the software interface developed for MSP. This testing included the cellular modem in order to confirm that the software interface could be viewed by MSP using an Internet connection in the field.

9

Autoscope Duo (from ISS)

Fixed Camera

Radar for Speed Detection

Cabinet Components

Cellular Modem

Field Processor

Figure 3.1 ESC4WZ Field Equipment and Cabinet Components

3.2 Software Interface

The software interface utilized by MSP is depicted below in Figure 3.2 and Figure 3.3. The software interface was developed based on a similar concept tested with MSP as part of an Enhanced Red Light Enforcement project in St. Cloud, MN.

The interface was designed to be accessible by an internet connection using a Google Chrome browser via the following link: http://wzone.mn.ims.digital:8080/. After system installation, it was discovered that MSP could only utilize either a Firefox or Internet Explorer web browser to view the interface. Given the similarities in operation between the Chrome and Firefox browsers, the Firefox browser was utilized by MSP throughout the project.

Figures 3.2 and 3.3 illustrate and describe the various portions of the home page and violation review page, respectively. The live video screen demonstrated the speeds of oncoming vehicles in white and red values. Vehicles with a white speed value were detected as traveling above the “Posted Speed” value set through the software interface, but below the “Trigger” speed of set through the software interface. Vehicles presented with a red speed value were detected as traveling above the “Trigger” speed value.

10

Description of Software Interface (Main Screen)

A- Live video screen B- Still image of last speeding violation C- Speed values for posted speed and violation speed D- Link to view video of most recent violation E- Summary list of last 20 violations

Figure 3.2 Software Interface (Main Screen)

For all vehicles traveling above the “Trigger” speed value, a short five-second video was recorded and stored within the field processor for review. This is presented in Figure 3.3 on the following page. A still image was also presented on the upper right side of the software interface. The purpose of the still image was to provide MSP with an image of the vehicle that would be approaching them at a high level of speed through the work zone. MSP could click on the Violation Review button to review the short video created of the vehicle detected above the “Trigger” value.

A B

C D

E

11

Description of Software Interface (Violation Review Screen)

A- Short video of last speeding violation B- Summary on last speed violation C- Screen shots of last violation

Figure 3.3 Software Interface (Violation Review Screen)

Figure 3.4 presents a graphic of how the software interface appeared within the MSP vehicle in the work zone. The vehicle was parked about 300 feet south of the system for initial testing purposes with MSP. The image in Figure 3.4 illustrates where the system was installed in the gore area to the right of I-35E (see item A), in addition to how vehicles viewed from that point through the software interface (see item C) were observed on the northbound side of the I-35E work zone (see item B). This visual testing and observation with MSP helped to illustrate the low latency that was observed in the amount of time at which it took for vehicles to pass the system and be presented in the software interface.

F

G H

12

Description of Software Interface (Violation Review Screen)

A- System Location in Field B- Vehicle Platoon on Road C- Vehicle Platoon Appearing on Software Interface on Laptop

Figure 3.4 Image of Software Interface in MSP Vehicle

3.3 Planning and Deployment Project Stages

This section contains a detailed overview of the stages through which the AECOM team worked with MnDOT and MSP during the planning and deployment of the ESC4WZ System. It should be noted that data collected by the AECOM team from the ESC4WZ team before, during and after MSP presence in the work zone is presented in Section 4 of this report.

3.3.1 Work Zone Coordination and Planning for System Installation

The AECOM team assessed a number of candidate MnDOT work zones throughout the project prior to deploying the system for operational testing. This assessment was guided by MSP comments early in the project, in which they expressed a desire to be parked approximately one half-mile downstream of the system. This distance would provide officers with ample time to receive an advance notification from the ESC4WZ system and begin their regular speed enforcement procedures described previously in Section 1.3 of this report.

This distance would also provide a good level of certainty that the speeding vehicle detected by the system would be the same vehicle passing them. Any greater distances would increase of

A

B

C

13

multiple vehicles of the same color and make/model to pass by MSP, which would decrease the certainty of the violation.

It was learned later on in the deployment stage of the project that greater distances than a half-mile increase the potential for vehicles to slow down upon seeing MSP vehicles parked on the side of the road. This can create an effect of other vehicles in a platoon to slow down as well, increasing the likelihood that the vehicle detected by the ESC4WZ System as traveling above the speed limit to also slow down by the time MSP is able to begin their regular speed limit enforcement procedures. This observation helps to confirm the need for MSP to be parked in close proximity to the system in order to be able to use the system effectively.

While the AECOM team performed a work zone assessment in the summer of 2015 and had selected a site for system installation in the I-94 work zone near Highway 241 in Rogers, the integration of the hardware and software elements of the ESC4WZ system presented challenges that delayed the deployment of the system into the 2016 year. These integration issues were resolved through further coordination between AECOM team members through winter of 2015 and spring of 2016.

3.3.2 April - May: Work Zone Coordination and Planning for Installation

The AECOM team worked to establish a demonstration of the ESC4WZ for multiple MnDOT work zone staff on April 28th at a location where the system was installed outside a conference room on a local street for review. The demonstration presented the functional features of the system and discussed next project steps related work zone selection.

The AECOM team also assessed multiple candidate MnDOT work zones for 2016 based on MSP feedback to be parked close to the system. This assessment reviewed the layout of the roadway corridor and potential safe locations at which MSP could perform speed limit enforcement. In April 2016, the AECOM team chose the I-35E work zone extending from County Road E to County Road J as the site at which to deploy the system.

The AECOM team met with one of the work zone contractors in May 2016 to review potential suitable locations at which the system could be installed. The most optimal location found was a gore area between the northbound lanes of I-35E and the northbound exit ramp leading to County Road J. This gore area provided an existing guardrail that could protect the system from oncoming traffic, and was also outside the boundary of the Contractor’s work zone. As a result, this location would not require the AECOM team to re-locate the system around the work zone to accommodate the progress of construction. The work zone contractor also desired the location given the potential for any damage that might occur to the system from moving construction equipment.

In addition, this location allowed for MSP to be parked in an area about a half-mile from the system, and also provided MSP with an ample shoulder from which they could accelerate and perform speed enforcement while being parked at the very end of the work zone. The actual MSP parking spot was about 0.65 miles from the system near the end of I-35E work zone as shown in Figure 3.5. Figure 3.6 also presents a view of the system installation at an area on the County Road J bridge looking south at the system location.

14

Figure 3.5 Overview of ESC4WZ System Location in I-35E Work Zone

Figure 3.6 ESC4WZ System Location (View from County Road J Looking South)

15

3.3.3 Work Zone Coordination and Planning for System Installation

Initial system installation was completed in early June 2016 by the AECOM team in the location presented in Figure 3.6. An initial challenge was encountered related to the strength of the cellular signal at the field location. The low strength of the signal was preventing the software interface from being properly presented through the web link established for the project. An additional antenna was installed on the mast arm of the trailer to strengthen the signal.

In addition, the initial testing included the verification of the speeds presented by the software interface against vehicle speeds gathered from an independent radar speed gun. Speeds measured by the lidar device and those speeds recorded by the system are presented in Section 4 of this report. In summary, the analysis positively indicated that the vehicle speeds presented in the ESC4WZ system were less than 1 MPH from speeds measured in the field with the lidar device.

Upon completion of this speed testing, the AECOM team worked with MnDOT and MSP to establish a schedule of system testing that would allow for the AECOM team to collect system data before, during, and after the presence of MSP within the I-35E work zone. This effort included establishing a work order between MnDOT and the Department of Public Safety to support the additional cost of speed limit enforcement by MSP in the work zone.

Multiple weeks of time were selected for speed limit enforcement by MSP to properly schedule the time of troopers for enforcement. Different scenarios were also envisioned during these weeks of enforcement to measure the effect of MSP presence on the speeds of travel in the work zone through use of the ESC4WZ System.

1. MSP at Exit of Work Zone 2. MnDOT Dynamic Speed Display Sign (Off/On) 3. MSP at Entrance of Work Zone

In addition to scheduling dates of enforcement, the ESC4WZ System allowed for the analysis of speed limit violations to pinpoint an ideal time in the day for when speed limit enforcement could be completed. The morning peak period of travel was initially chosen between 6:00am and 9:00am. Figure 3.7 below presents a sample graphic of how speed limit violations were illustrated to help determine a period of time during speed limit enforcement could be performed. Although higher numbers of speed limit violations were recorded in the evening periods, similar to the week of Aug. 15th as presented in Figure 3.7, it was desired to maintain a morning period of time for enforcement to allow for sufficient daylight in use of the system by MSP and maintain consistent application of the system across all periods on the project.

It should be noted that this can be one of the key advantages of use of the ESC4WZ System in future deployments for MSP. The ability to review times of the day in this manner would allow for speed limit enforcement periods to match the periods of the greatest amount of speed limit violations.

16

Figure 3.7 Sample Summary of Speed Limit Violations

MSP was also provided with a comment form that they could use to note their observations on their use of the system and any issues that they encountered. These forms were completed and returned to the AECOM team throughout three weeks of speed limit enforcement in the work zone. Overall, there were four different MSP staff that utilized the ESC4WZ system in the work zone. One MSP officer spent a majority of the time using the system (11 reported dates), another MSP officer reported on two dates, while the other two MSP officers each spent one date using the system. Detailed responses are included in Appendix B to this report.

Figure 3.8 presents a copy of a blank form that was provided to MSP. The prompt return of comments by MSP allowed for the AECOM team to respond quickly to issues that were reported during field testing.

17

Figure 3.8 Observation Form for MSP in Use of the ESC4WZ System

3.3.4 MSP Testing Period 1: Week of July 25th

The system was initially tested by MSP in the field during the week of July 25th. MSP was requested to be parked at the end of the work zone. Initial issues discovered by MSP were related to IT restrictions on the ability to view the webpage on which the software interface was being provided. It was also discovered that MSP could only utilize either a Firefox or Internet Explorer web browser to view the software interface. Given the similarities in operation

Please Contact:Rashmi Brewer or Dan NelsonMnDOT Project Manager AECOM Project Consultant651-234-7063 612-376-2061Rashmi.Brewer@state.mn.us dan.nelson@aecom.com

Questions?

Was Inclement Weather Present? (Circle / underline one) Yes / No

Please describe any issues you observed in the operation of the

ESC4WZ System here.

Please note any additional comments / observations on the

ESC4WZ System here.

State Patrol Observation Worksheet for Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Officer Name:

Date of Enforcement

Time Period of Enforcement:

18

between the Chrome and Firefox browsers, the Firefox browser was utilized by MSP throughout the project.

A field visit by AECOM to review the software interface and its operation within the MSP vehicle was also made on Friday, July 29th to verify how the system was being used by MSP. It was learned through this field visit that it is preferable for MSP to be parked at a perpendicular angle to the roadway on which they are performing speed enforcement. This allows MSP to aim the lidar device directly outside the passenger (or driver) window at oncoming traffic, obtain a violation speed, drop the lidar device onto the passenger seat of the vehicle, and then accelerate in the MSP vehicle after the violator.

While the area north of County Road J that had been envisioned as a suitable location for enforcement, it was learned in the field review this area would not allow for the safe and efficient parking of the vehicle perpendicular to the roadway. The right side of northbound I-35E did not provide ample ground on which the vehicle could be safely parked at a perpendicular angle to the roadway. The rear wheels of the vehicle would not have been on the shoulder asphalt not providing MSP ground on which to accelerate and perform speed enforcement.

Upon completion of the field review, the AECOM team communicated with MnDOT and the work zone contractor to determine if Class 5 rock requested by MSP could be laid by the Contractor in the area on the right side of I-35E. After reviewing the desired location, the Contractor deemed the area unstable for the rock to support the weight of the MSP vehicle given the presence of cattails and other vegetation in the area. The Class 5 rock was instead placed by the Contractor on the left side of I-35E following the first week of system use by MSP.

3.3.5 MSP Testing Period 2: Week of August 8th

The system was tested for a second week by MSP during the week of August 8th, also with MSP requested to be parked at the end of the work zone. A second field visit by AECOM to review the software interface and its operation within the MSP vehicle was made on Friday, August 12th to verify how the system was being used by MSP given the changes made to the work zone area.

It was discovered that although the left side of northbound I-35E provided ample ground for perpendicular parking with the Class 5 rock, the presence of work zone concrete barriers along that side of northbound I-35E prohibited a line of sight between the oncoming vehicles and the lidar device utilized by MSP. As a result, MSP was only able to utilize the system to assist their speed limit enforcement while parking parallel to I-35E on the right shoulder.

The challenges with parallel parking for speed limit enforcement were also demonstrated in the field review. In order to reliably use the ESC4WZ system, MSP waited first receive an advance notice from the system about a vehicle in excess of the “Trigger” speed limit, then quickly exited the vehicle to aim the lidar device at northbound traffic. Once that vehicle’s violation speed was obtained, MSP had to re-enter the vehicle and then drop the lidar device, prior to accelerating after the vehicle in violation of the speed limit. These added steps of having to leave the vehicle and then re-enter the vehicle made the use of the system by the Trooper less desirable for safety reasons given the need for parallel parking on the shoulder.

19

MSP staff also observed that a higher resolution camera would enhance the use of the system by increasing the level of certainty that the speeding vehicle observed in the software interface is the same vehicle to which a speeding citation is issued by MSP. While a higher resolution camera is possible from the manufacturer, it could create a conflict with the cellular data plan used for the system in that a higher resolution camera would increase the size of the video being streamed over the internet.

Upon completion of the field review, the AECOM team communicated with the work zone contractor and the MnDOT Project Manager to determine if a number of barriers could be removed to provide a clear line of sight from the left side of I-35E. The contractor noted that this would have required additional protective barrier equipment to be installed to reduce the risk and severity of a front end collision of a northbound vehicle into the remaining concrete barriers on that side of the roadway.

While the AECOM Team discussed the option of performing this additional work of barrier removal with the MnDOT Project Manager in late August, the Contractor’s project schedule indicated that the barriers would be removed within the month of October 2016. Given the added cost of barrier removal and logistics of completing the work, the AECOM Team determined it would be more feasible to wait for removal of the barriers per the Contractor’s project schedule.

3.3.6 MSP Testing Periods 3 and 4: Weeks of August 29th and Sept. 12th

The system was tested for a third and fourth week by MSP during the weeks of August 29th and September 12th. While MSP continued to use the ESC4WZ system, the work zone concrete barriers prevented an efficient use of the speed lidar device by MSP while parked north of County Road J. In addition, there were a few days in these weeks in which MSP could not provide a trooper for

Though speed limit enforcement was not performed during the week of Aug. 29th, there was still data gathered with the presence of MSP parked at different locations within the work zone with their vehicle lights on and off on different dates. A summary of the data gathered during this week is presented in Section 4 of this report. In summary, the data gathered this week indicated that the lights of the vehicle, as well as the proximity of the vehicle to the ESC4WZ system, had a noticeable impact on the speed of the vehicles in the work zone.

MSP did attempt to find alternate locations during the week of Sept. 12th that could have been utilized for parking of their vehicle. However, no suitable locations could be found where MSP could be reliably parked at a perpendicular angle to the roadway

The previous challenges with use of the system due to the concrete barriers led to discussions about possible use of tandem MSP enforcement in the work zone. It was learned that tandem speed limit enforcement has a similar set of procedures to be followed by MSP. The first officer making visual contact with a vehicle in violation of the speed limit must maintain visual contact with the vehicle until it passes the second vehicle parked downstream. However, the curve of the I-35E corridor in the work zone prohibited the effective use of tandem enforcement as an option in the work zone.

20

The AECOM team remained in communication with MnDOT and the work zone contractor on the schedule and timing of the removal of the barriers from the work zone through September and October. It was envisioned that they might be removed and replaced with orange barrels, which would remove the last obstacle to the safe and effective use of the ESC4WZ system by MSP. However, delays to construction activity made the scheduling of MSP staff for work zone speed enforcement difficult in October and November.

3.3.7 System Operations October – November 2016

While the use of solar power for system operations was tested early in the project, the AECOM team utilized the nearby presence of power via a MnDOT cabinet in the work zone for the periods of operational testing by MSP. In early October, the AECOM team switched from local power to solar power to gauge the amount of time the system could operate on the solar batteries present on the system trailer.

It is estimated that the system lasted for approximately one week in early October on solar power, in part due to the less than optimal placement of the system for receiving the maximum amount of sunlight. It was learned through system testing on solar power that the internal field processor was not able to function properly when system batteries were low on energy. A fluctuation in the amount of voltage being provided to the processor likely caused a malfunction in the field processor that prevented the use of the software interface through the web link provided to MSP.

The AECOM team worked to remove the field processor and have it shipped to Iron Mountain Systems for repair in early November 2016. However, after re-installation of the field processor in the system cabinet in November, the ESC4WZ software interface could not be accessed via the internet. It is estimated that the voltage fluctuations from the low amount of solar power may have had impacts to other system components as well.

Upon further internal discussion of the problem, it was recommended that a regulator of the solar power being provided to the internal system components would prevent a similar problem from re-occurring in the field. This additional system component is recommended for installation in the system cabinet prior to re-installation of the system at alternate locations where solar power will be relied upon for system operations.

The week of November 14th was scheduled with MSP for speed limit enforcement with the expectation that the ESC4WZ System would be repaired for use by MSP. However, the aforementioned issues with the solar power prevented the system from returning to operation. The system was eventually removed from the work zone on November 17th in advance of a winter storm that would have made system removal unlikely until the spring thaw of 2017.

Table 3.2 below presents a summary of the overall installation and operational timeline for the ESC4WZ System.

21

Table 3.2 System Installation and Operation Timeline

Dates Activity Notes/ System Issues

April through May

Coordination with MnDOT and Work Zone Contractor

Review of work zone staging and contractor schedules determined the timing and location of where the system could be placed.

June 3 System brought to field location near County Road J

Issue related to cellular coverage in project was mitigated with the installation of additional antennae on arm of trailer

June 17 Initial system testing and monitoring completed

System testing included use of lidar device and checking against speeds reported through software interface.

July 25-29 First week of use by MSP in work zone

MSP reported issue in not being able to use Google Chrome browser. System was used instead with a Firefox internet browser.

Aug. 8-12 Second week of use by MSP in work zone

Field visit scheduled with MSP to observe system operations

Aug. 29- Sept. 2 Third week of use by MSP in work zone

System tested with MSP at multiple locations in the work zone.

Sept. 12- Sept. 16 Fourth week of use by MSP in work zone

Final week of use by MSP in the work zone. Use of tandem enforcement was explored, but not implemented due to work zone geometrics and timing.

October through November

System repairs from issues with solar power fluctuation

Repair to field processor was completed in early November but communications to software interface could not be restored.

Nov. 17th System removal from work zone Decision made to remove the system in advance of winter storm on Nov. 17th, 2016.

22

CHAPTER 4: ESC4WZ SYSTEM EVALUATION

This section contains the results of the evaluation of the ESC4WZ System. In following with the Systems Engineering process, the system will be evaluated against the goals and objectives of the project, in addition to being evaluated against the quantitative data collected by the system and the qualitative input provided by MSP.

4.1 System Validation Process

The intent of the System Validation process is to measure the goals and objectives that were documented within the Concept of Operations for the project. Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs) have been proposed to demonstrate the system is meeting the goals and objectives that were defined at the beginning of the project. Table 4.1 contains a summary of the proposed MOEs that trace back to the goals and objectives of the ESC4WZ System previously identified in the Concept of Operations.

Table 4.1 Validation Plan Measures of Effectiveness

Goals and Objectives from Concept of Operations Validation Plan MOEs

Goal

Increase vehicle speed compliance with the speed limits posted within work zone sites through the use of ESC4WZ System by MnDOT and the MSP.

Increase in vehicle speed compliance with posted speed limit measured after ESC4WZ system installation and countermeasure implementation within a work zone.

Objectives

1. Enhance the safety and efficiency of the speed enforcement process by MSP within work zone locations.

MSP indicates that system enhanced the safety and efficiency of speed enforcement.

2. Develop an easy-to-use graphical user interface that can assist MSP to accurately determine the speed of approaching vehicles.

MSP indicates that user interface enhances the efficiency of speed enforcement.

3. Provide performance metrics that can be utilized to assess the need for enforcement, as well as, the efficiency of various other speed reduction countermeasures.

System provides ability to analyze performance metrics that reveal the need for enforcement and the effectiveness of countermeasures.

23

4.2 System Validation Results

A summary of the four MOEs listed in Table 4.1 is presented in the following sub-sections. These sections were included within the Validation Plan document developed for the project and have been modified to reflect actual conditions encountered in the project.

During the system’s operational period, the AECOM team developed a process that allowed for the automated extraction of data on speed violations from the system. The data extracted included the date and time stamp of the speeding violation recorded, as well as, the speed of the vehicle detected by the ESC4WZ system.

The data was extracted in multiple week-long periods over the course of the project and is presented in the following sub-sections.

4.2.1 MOE #1 – Assessment of Enhanced Speed Compliance

This MOE pertains to the increase in work zone speed compliance through the use of the ESC4WZ System and various work zone countermeasures implemented to deter motorists from traveling too far over the posted speed limit in the work zone.

Data on the number of speed violations above the Trigger speed in the work zone, as measured by the number of video recordings made by the system, were collected between August 1st and September 23rd. This period of time allowed for an understanding on how many violations were recorded before, during, and after MSP was present in the work zone on three different sub-sets of time while the ECS4WZ system was in operation.

Figure 4.1 displays the number of speed violations above the Trigger speed recorded by the system around the August 8th week of MSP enforcement. During that week, MSP was parked one half-mile north of County Road J, where the system was installed. The first hour period of time experienced the greatest reduction in the number of violations recorded by the system, a reduction from 25 violations in that hour to a total of 13 violations when MSP was present. The second hour experienced a smaller reduction in violations, while the third and fourth one hour periods did not experience any reductions in violations. The data helps to verify that MSP’s presence did serve to deter a number of vehicles from traveling in excess of 75 MPH through the work zone.

24

Figure 4.1 Total Count of Vehicles Traveling Above Trigger Speed (75 MPH) during Speed Enforcement Time Periods with MSP Parked North of County Road J

Figure 4.2 displays the number of speed violations above the Trigger speed recorded by the system during specific one-day periods within the August 29th week of MSP enforcement. Below is a summary description of the actions taken during these one-day periods:

1. Aug. 30th – MSP parked inside work zone on left side of I-35E with no lights activated, while parked ¾-mile south of system location at County Road J.

2. Aug. 31st – MSP parked inside work zone on left side of I-35E with lights activated, while parked ¾-mile south of system location at County Road J.

3. Sept. 1st – MSP parked inside work zone on left side of I-35E with lights activated, while parked 3 miles south of system location at County Road J.

Note, that MSP was present inside of the work zone during this week of enforcement given the issues related to the lack of a suitable parking location for effective speed enforcement north of County Road J. The improvement in speed compliance from Aug. 30th to Aug. 31st was notable with the activation of the lights on the MSP while being parked in the same location at a ¾-mile distance from the system, and this was noted in comments provided by MSP during this period.

However, this was a noticeable increase in speed violations recorded by the system when the MSP was parked 3 miles south of the system on Sept. 1st. It is believed that the vehicles traveling above the speed limit recorded by the system felt comfortable with increasing their speed the farther away they traveled from MSP in the work zone.

25

Figure 4.2 Total Count of Vehicles Traveling Above Trigger Speed (75 MPH) during Speed Enforcement Time Periods with MSP Parked South of County Road J

Figure 4.3 displays the number of speed violations recorded by the system during the September 12th week of MSP enforcement. While MSP was parked north of County Road J during this period of time, the number of speed violations recorded by the system increased during the week of MSP enforcement. It should be noted there was a change in the posted speed limit from 55 to 60 MPH that occurred in early September, which likely resulted in a change in driver behavior of motorists that regularly traveled through the work zone.

MSP attempted to find suitable locations for use of the system while being parked on the left side of I-35E behind the concrete barriers, yet was unable to find a safe location to park for speed enforcement.

26

Figure 4.3 Total Count of Vehicles Traveling Above Trigger Speed (75 MPH) during Speed Enforcement Time Periods with MSP Parked North of County Road J

The graphs presented in Figures 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 display a mixed set of results in terms of how the ESC4WZ System and MSP presence in the work zone serve to achieve the overall goal of the project to enhance speed compliance within the work zone. The aforementioned challenges of finding a safe parking location for MSP to perform effective speed enforcement and the change in the posted work zone speed limit from 55 to 60 MPH are believed to have contributed to these mixed results.

4.2.2 MOE #2 – Enhance Safety of Speed Enforcement

This MOE pertains to the safety and efficiency of the work zone speed limit enforcement by MSP officers. This MOE will be measured qualitatively through interviews with MSP officers who utilized the ESC4WZ system on one or multiple occasions as a tool to assist their regular speed limit enforcement procedures.

As noted previously, two field reviews were conducted on July 29th, 2016 and on August 12th, 2016 with the same MSP officer that had been using the ESC4WZ system for those days. The safety aspect of parking at a perpendicular angle with the roadway for enforcement purposes was illustrated by the MSP officer during these field reviews. This type of parking allows for quick and easy use of the radar speed gun and subsequent performance of speed enforcement. However, the work zone area north of the ESC4WZ did not present a safe location where perpendicular parking could be made an MSP vehicle and still allow for effective use of the ESC4WZ system.

Although the system was used by the MSP officer while being parked at a parallel angle with the roadway, it introduced a greater challenge to the MSP officer of being able to effectively use the advance notification provided by the ESC4WZ system. Thus, the safety of speed enforcement

27

was not enhanced since a perpendicular angle could not be provided in the work zone as detailed previously in Section 3.3 of this report.

The lessons learned through these field reviews have shaped a key recommendation in the event that the system is used in future years. Planning for the ESC4WZ system location and MSP placement in the development of the work zone traffic management plan will enhance the safety of speed enforcement in potential future deployments of the ESC4WZ System.

4.2.3 MOE #3 – Enhance the Efficiency of Speed Detection

This MOE pertains to the efficiency of detecting speeds measured by the ESC4WZ System. This MOE will be measured qualitatively through interviews with MSP officers who utilized the ESC4WZ system on one or multiple occasions as a tool to assist their regular speed limit enforcement procedures. This MOE closely relates to the previous MOE on enhancing the safety of speed enforcement discussed in the previous section.

As noted previously, the challenge of parallel parking for speed limit enforcement was demonstrated in the August 12th field review. In order to reliably use the ESC4WZ system, the MSP officer waited first receive an advance notice from the system about a vehicle in excess of the “Trigger” speed limit, then quickly exited the vehicle to aim the lidar device at northbound traffic. Once that vehicle’s violation speed was obtained, MSP had to re-enter the vehicle and then drop the lidar device, prior to accelerating after the vehicle in violation of the speed limit. These added steps of having to leave the vehicle and then re-enter the vehicle made the use of the ESC4WZ system in performing speed detection less efficient.

As a result, the efficiency of speed detection was not enhanced since a perpendicular angle could not be provided in the work zone as detailed previously in Section 3.3 of this report. As noted previously, a key recommendation for future potential deployments is planning for sufficient space within the work zone to support perpendicular parking for MSP vehicles in the work zone.

4.2.4 MOE #4 – Provide Performance Metrics for Analysis

This MOE pertains to the use of data collected from the ESC4WZ System in planning for the scheduling of speed enforcement by MSP. Figure 4.4 below demonstrates a summary of the number of speed violations recorded by the ESC4WZ System during a one-week period of time by each of the day.

A view of the graph demonstrates that the highest periods of speed violations occurred in the morning and evening peak periods of travel, with the highest number of violations occurring in the 6:00 pm hour. MSP could use similar types of graphs such as these to plan for future shifts of speed enforcement in the work zone.

28

Figure 4.4 Total Count of Vehicles Traveling Above Trigger Speed Value (75 MPH) during Week of Aug. 1st

4.3 System Validation Results

For the more detailed System Evaluation, vehicle speeds measured by the ESC4WZ System were compared against vehicle speeds gathered from an independent radar speed gun. Speeds measured by the lidar device and those speeds recorded by the system are presented in Table 4.2.

A total of 99 vehicles were measured with an independent radar speed gun in the field on June 21st, 2016. Vehicle speeds were gathered in the field and simultaneously monitored in the system interface for approximately 45 minutes of time during regular traffic patterns.

The total number of 99 vehicles was determined as a sufficient enough sample size to be able to determine with a 95% level of statistical significance that the speeds measured by the lidar device will be within at least 1 MPH of the speeds detected by the Autoscope Duo unit.

Figure 4.5 contains the results of a 95% statistical significance test on the data presented in Table 4.2. The analysis positively indicated that the vehicle speeds presented in the ESC4WZ system were less than 1 MPH from speeds measured in the field with the lidar device.

29

Table 4.2 Speed Validation for Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zone

Data Collected on 6/21/2016 (Total of 99 Samples)

Sample No. Speed Data (MPH)

Lidar device Autoscope Duo Sensor Absolute Difference 1 55 54 1 2 57 57 0 3 56 56 0 4 57 60 3 5 50 50 0 6 58 59 1 7 61 62 1 8 57 57 0 9 58 58 0

10 60 61 1 11 55 58 3 12 56 56 0 13 57 57 0 14 58 59 1 15 55 56 1 16 53 53 0 17 58 59 1 18 59 61 2 19 53 53 0 20 57 57 0 21 60 61 1 22 58 58 0 23 58 58 0 24 50 50 0 25 60 60 0 26 54 55 1 27 54 55 1 28 60 61 1 29 58 59 1 30 60 59 1 31 52 56 4 32 60 60 0 33 56 56 0 34 58 59 1 35 59 59 0 36 52 53 1

30

Table 4.2 Speed Validation for Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zone

Data Collected on 6/21/2016 (Total of 99 Samples)

Sample No. Speed Data (MPH)

Lidar device Autoscope Duo Sensor Absolute Difference 37 60 61 1 38 61 62 1 39 56 56 0 40 78 79 1 41 56 56 0 42 54 55 1 43 58 60 2 44 55 56 1 45 54 55 1 46 56 56 0 47 60 61 1 48 55 55 0 49 65 64 1 50 63 64 1 51 59 59 0 52 57 58 1 53 59 59 0 54 60 62 2 55 60 61 1 56 55 57 2 57 59 58 1 58 55 57 2 59 61 61 0 60 60 62 2 61 53 53 0 62 54 54 0 63 56 58 2 64 58 57 1 65 55 57 2 66 56 56 0 67 59 58 1 68 55 55 0 69 59 60 1 70 61 61 0 71 56 56 0 72 79 78 1

31

Table 4.2 Speed Validation for Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zone

Data Collected on 6/21/2016 (Total of 99 Samples)

Sample No. Speed Data (MPH)

Lidar device Autoscope Duo Sensor Absolute Difference 73 63 64 1 74 66 67 1 75 66 67 1 76 68 68 0 77 57 59 2 78 54 55 1 79 64 64 0 80 58 59 1 81 63 64 1 82 55 55 0 83 59 59 0 84 61 61 0 85 54 54 0 86 62 62 0 87 58 58 0 88 60 60 0 89 60 61 1 90 61 62 1 91 54 55 1 92 64 64 0 93 65 65 0 94 63 65 2 95 57 59 2 96 58 59 1 97 53 55 2 98 57 59 2 99 57 57 0

Average Speed 58.3 58.9

32

Figure 4.5 Results of 95% Statistical Significance Test on Vehicle Samples

t-Test: Two-Sample Assuming Equal Variances Lidar device System Speed

Mean 58.31313131 58.94949495 Variance 20.64584622 20.21170893 Observations 99 99 Pooled Variance 20.42877757 Hypothesized Mean Difference * 0 df 196 t Stat * -0.990573634 P(T<=t) one-tail 0.16155756 t Critical one-tail * 1.652665059 P(T<=t) two-tail 0.323115119 t Critical two-tail 1.972141222 * Note: Result of the “t Critical one-tail” value being greater than the “t Stat” variable proves the hypothesized mean difference of zero in this comparison of the system’s measured speeds and the lidar device measured speeds.

33

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This section contains conclusions on the overall ESC4WZ System and recommendations for MnDOT to consider in deploying further systems at other locations along other work zones and corridors.

5.1 Conclusions

A summary of the goals and objectives as presented in the Concept of Operations in addition to general conclusions on each of these objectives are provided in Figure 5.1.

Goals and Objectives from Concept of Operations Conclusions

Goal

Increase vehicle speed compliance with the speed limits posted within work zone sites through the use of ESC4WZ System by MnDOT and the MSP.

Compliance with posted speed limit increased in some periods of enforcement, but not in others.

Objectives

1. Enhance the safety and efficiency of the speed enforcement process by MSP within work zone locations.

Safety of enforcement was impeded by work zone barriers and lack of sufficient shoulder width for vehicles; efficiency of system was verified through MSP feedback during system operations.

2. Develop an easy-to-use graphical user interface that can assist MSP to accurately identify and determine the speed of approaching vehicles to begin the V.A.S.T. process.

System interface received positive feedback from MSP despite challenges with safe parking location Some improvements were also identified and recommended for future use

3. Provide performance metrics that can be utilized to assess the need for enforcement, as well as, the efficiency of various other speed reduction countermeasures

Graphical depiction of speed violations by time of day illustrated how enforcement could be targeted to improve speed compliance

Figure 5.1 Summary of Conclusions on ESC4WZ System

34

5.2 Lessons Learned and Considerations for Future Installation

The lessons learned and considerations for future installation are based on the project experiences described in this report, along with feedback obtained by MnDOT and MSP stakeholder interviews as a reflection prior to project completion.

5.2.1 Integration of System Placement with Work Zone Traffic Management Plan

The most important lesson learned related to improving safety of MSP that utilize the ESC4WZ System is the need for a safe and sufficient shoulder on which the MSP vehicle can be parked to efficiently perform speed enforcement. The parking location of the MSP vehicle in relation to the ESC4WZ System is critical given the constrained conditions and limited sight distance in work zones which makes it difficult to enforce speed limits in work zones. While the AECOM team coordinated with MnDOT and the work zone contractor throughout the I-35E work zone project on system placement, the safest and most efficient parking location could not be established for MSP.

After the completion of field testing, MnDOT reached out to the work zone safety supervisor with the MnDOT Office of Construction Innovative Contracting to discuss project experiences with the system and the work zone. The work zone safety supervisor recommended that considerations for system placement should be made early in the process of developing a work zone traffic management plan. This is the stage at which MnDOT can require a work zone contractor to construct a sufficient shoulder width to support an MSP Vehicle that would need to be parked near the ESC4WZ system for speed enforcement to enhance the overall safety of using the system.

Given the innovative nature of the ESC4WZ System and the lessons learned through its use by MSP, further guidance would need to be provided to MnDOT work zone planners on how to create the most optimal arrangement of the system equipment and MSP staff for speed enforcement. The following items would need to be considered in planning for use of the ESC4WZ system at the work zone traffic management planning stage:

1. ESC4WZ System Placement. The system resides on a portable trailer and would require some form of barrier protection from oncoming vehicular traffic.

2. A parking spot for an MSP vehicle at a perpendicular angle to the roadway. This parking angle allows MSP staff to use their existing lidar device in the most optimal manner so that they can quickly obtain a speed value prior to safely accelerating onto the roadway to perform speed enforcement.

3. An area in which speed enforcement can safely be performed by MSP. Beyond the I-35E work zone, the stretch of I-35E roadway was very linear with ample room on the right shoulder of traffic. This provided safe room for State Patrol to perform speed enforcement on the shoulder outside of the work zone. It also provided good visibility for oncoming vehicles to see the MSP vehicle and move over to the left lane of traffic during the enforcement process.

With these three considerations in mind, planning for the ESC4WZ system location in future work zones can optimize the overall safety of the speed enforcement process for MSP staff. It is

35

likely that the placement of the system and MSP vehicle would be near the end of the work zone to allow room on the shoulder of the roadway to perform speed enforcement, similar to how it was performed in the I-35E work zone. This process will also provide work zone planners with to include any added costs of barrier placement and / or class 5rock placement within the work zone construction cost estimate.

The value of planning for system placement within the work zone traffic management plan was also re-iterated during project de-brief interviews that were conducted by the MnDOT ESC4WZ Project Manager with both MSP staff and with the I-35E work zone supervisor.

MnDOT interviewed MSP staff and gathered valuable feedback on the need for safe and effective parking at the perpendicular angle to traffic in the work zone. MSP staff noted that any future deployments of the ESC4WZ system would require communication between MnDOT and MSP on what the expectations would be of new MSP staff that are un-familiar with the system. A graphical depiction of the system location in the work zone in relation to where an MSP vehicle could be safely parked would create a better understanding for MSP staff prior to scheduling set shifts for MSP speed enforcement. Ideally, this location information would be determined during the work zone traffic management plan and could be shared with MSP prior to requesting speed enforcement in the work zone. MSP has also expressed a desire to use the ESC4WZ system for data collection on speed / traffic patterns to help determine effective speed enforcement saturations.

Also, MnDOT interviewed the I-35E work zone project supervisor to gather insight on the value of the system to the contractors working within the work zone. The presence of MSP staff in the work zone is supported by Contractors given the desired impact of reducing travel speeds due to potential speed enforcement. The work zone contractor and MnDOT project supervisor indicated their primary concern was with the decision point of when to enforce the speed limit within the work zone. In general, there is a preference to have the work zone speed limit enforced at any detected speed that is 5 MPH or greater beyond the work zone speed limit. Although a very large number of vehicles were detected as traveling at a 5 MPH or greater level in the work zone, it is believed that this level of enforcement would have a significant impact on enhancing speed compliance with the work zone speed limit.

In summary, the key considerations for ESC4WZ system placement and MSP vehicle placement are listed below:

1. MSP should be safely parked in a location no more than one half-mile beyond the system location for effective use. MSP requires a sufficient roadway shoulder so that they can be parked at a perpendicular angle to the roadway. This increases safety of the overall speed enforcement process by allowing for a quick and effective use of the lidar device that is required and used by MSP.

2. An ideal placement of the system and MSP would be at a diamond interchange where MSP can be parked on the opposite side of the interchange from the system. A temporary installation of Class 5 rock by the contractor would suffice for supporting the weight of the vehicle. This would help to increase the safety and efficiency of the system usage by MSP.

3. There should be a sufficient shoulder along the roadway on which MSP could accelerate after a vehicle is confirmed as a violator of the speed limit within the work zone. The shoulder

36

provides a safe location for the vehicle to be stopped and for MSP to perform speed enforcement. An ideal location for system placement would be near the end of the work zone where MSP could still perform enforcement of the work zone speed limit, yet have a safe location for enforcement when pulling over the violator beyond the limit of the work zone.

5.2.2 System Component Modifications

There are three main modifications that could be made to the ESC4WZ System to improve system operations for MSP. These are summarized in order below in order of importance:

1. The ESC4WZ system’s ability to function successfully for a longer period of time on solar power would require the addition of a solar power regulator device to be installed within the cabinet on the trailer. The regulator can serve to cut power to system components when the amount of voltage remaining in solar power batteries is low. This can safeguard the system components from malfunction when a borderline sufficient amount of voltage is being provided for their function. The fluctuation in voltage can cause damage to the components, which was a lesson learned near the end of the project with the system operating on solar power. The regulator is a common component installed within systems that rely upon solar power and require large batteries that were procured for the ESC4WZ System. The AECOM team has identified a regulator that could be implemented within the ESC4WZ system and would include it in any future installation.

2. A second system modification would be to adjust the resolution of the Autoscope camera to provide a higher resolution image of the vehicle that was detected in violation of the speed limit. This can help to increase the certainty of the State Trooper in issuing a citation (based on their own laser or radar equipment use/observations) to the same vehicle that was detected by the system as having traveled in excess of the posted speed limit. While this is possible with the existing camera, testing should be performed to evaluate the amount of bandwidth consumed by the transmission of higher resolution images over the cellular modem. This would also require the replacement of the existing 3G modem in the trailer with a 4G modem that provides for higher data speeds and could better accommodate the increased amount of data streaming with a higher resolution camera.

3. A third system modification would be an upgrade to the software interface used by MSP to observe vehicles in the work zone. This upgrade would present a near real-time summary of violations occurring over the past week(s) of time to allow MSP an ability to effectively schedule shifts for speed enforcement. Currently, the analysis of data from the system is time-consuming and requires post-processing of the data in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet.

MSP has expressed a desire to use the system for data collection on speed / traffic patterns to help determine effective enforcement saturations.

37

5.3 Recommendations for Future Installation and Cost Estimates

This section contains next steps for MnDOT to consider taking with the ESC4WZ System. Further discussions with the project team can take place in subsequent meetings to determine how these steps can be taken to help improve the overall safety of speed enforcement by MSP.

5.3.1 Develop Procedures for System Incorporation into Work Zone Design

The development of procedures for a work zone traffic management planning based on the lessons learned in this project is another recommended step for the ESC4WZ System. This will provide MnDOT engineers with an understanding of how to plan for the location of the system and allow for any added costs of installation to be included within the work zone construction estimate while enhancing speed compliance to improve safety for roadway workers, MSP troopers, and the motoring public.

5.3.2 Perform System Modifications

As described in the previous sub-section, there are three system components that would require modification to improve system operations. The first modification was the addition of a solar power regulator to better manage power provided to system components, and should be completed prior to re-enabling the system for use in a MnDOT work zone. This would require labor and time from both Image Sensing Systems and the software interface developer (Iron Mountain Systems) to ensure the system is fully operational. AECOM staff would also provide system installation oversight in the work zone, and would communicate with MnDOT and MSP on where the system would be implemented in the selected MnDOT work zone. This would include developing procedures for how the ESC4WZ System could be incorporated into future MnDOT work zone designs.

Table 5.1 contains a summary of the estimated costs to re-enable the ESC4WZ System, which reflects input from both Image Sensing Systems and Iron Mountain Systems on the project, as well as estimated system storage and transportation costs for one full season of work zone construction. It should be noted that these costs are only estimated for consideration by MnDOT in planning for any potential future deployment of the ESC4WZ system in additional MnDOT work zones.

38

Table 5.1 Cost Estimate to Re-Enable System for Future MnDOT Work Zone Item Costs Cost Estimate Notes

Surge Protection Upgrade $1,000.00 Includes work needed to be completed by Image Sensing Systems

Re-Enable System Operations $5,000.00 Includes trip to re-activate system for Iron Mountain Systems

AECOM Coordination Labor Services $20,000.00 Assumes 80 to 100 hours of oversight and

communication with MnDOT and MSP System Storage Costs $1,800.00 $300/mo. for 6 months System Transportation Costs $1,800.00 $300/trip for 6 trips

Work Zone Relocation Costs $3,400.00 $300/move for 3 moves. Also includes ISS time to perform configuration at the sites to map the radar and video

Battery Charging Costs $3,600.00 2 trips/mo. for 6 months ($300/trip)

Total Cost $36,600.00 Total cost to re-enable system for one full work zone season

Additional system modifications to the system, though not required, would address comments raised by MSP during their use of the system to improve its overall operations. These are summarized below in further detail.

1. Improved cellular modem and use of a higher resolution on the existing camera is also recommended to help improve MSP confidence in the system.

2. Software interface upgrade that presents a near real-time summary of violations occurring over the past week(s) of time to allow MSP to effectively schedule shifts for speed enforcement.

Table 5.2 contains a summary of the estimated costs to both re-enable and enhance the ESC4WZ System with these two system modifications, which also reflects input from both ISS and Iron Mountain Systems, as well as estimated system storage and transportation costs.

Table 5.2 Cost Estimate to Re-Enable and Enhance System for Future MnDOT Work Zone Item Costs Cost Estimate Notes System Interface Software Update for Dashboard Analysis (Iron Mountain Systems)

$35,000.00 Includes software modifications to accept higher camera resolution and include dashboard on violations occurring throughout the day

Update for Higher Camera Resolution (ISS) $4,000.00 Update for Higher Camera Resolution

AECOM Coordination Labor Services $20,000.00 Assumes 80 to 100 hours of oversight and

communication with MnDOT and MSP System Storage Costs $1,800.00 $300/mo. for 6 months System Transportation Costs $1,800.00 $300/trip for 6 trips

Work Zone Relocation Costs $3,400.00 $300/move for 3 moves. Also includes ISS time to perform configuration at the sites to map the radar and video

Battery Charging Costs $3,600.00 2 trips/mo. for 6 months ($300/trip)

Total Cost $69,600.00 Total cost to re-enable and enhance system for one full work zone season

39

Finally, in the event that an additional system would desire to be procured by MnDOT for use by MSP in an alternate work zone during a construction season, Table 5.3 contains a summary of the estimated costs to deploy an additional ESC4WZ System that includes the system modifications described above. As noted previously, these costs are only estimated for consideration by MnDOT in planning for any potential future deployment of the ESC4WZ system in additional MnDOT work zones.

Table 5.3 Cost Estimate to Procure Additional System for Additional MnDOT Work Zone Item Costs Cost Estimate Notes

Integrate Additional Duo Sensor (ISS) $4,000.00 Includes cost to integrate an additional Autoscope Duo sensor

System Integration of Additional System $10,000.00 Integration for additional system (40 hours)

Additional Trailer Purchase $40,000.00 Estimated purchase price of trailer to own outright for future use

AECOM Coordination Labor Services $20,000.00 Assumes 80 to 100 hours of oversight and communication with MnDOT and MSP

Iron Mountain License Fee $15,000.00 Estimated license fee to implement software interface on additional system

System Storage Costs $1,800.00 $300/mo. for 6 months System Transportation Costs $1,800.00 $300/trip for 6 trips

Work Zone Relocation Costs $3,400.00 $300/move for 3 moves. Also includes ISS time to perform configuration at the sites to map the radar and video

Battery Charging Costs $3,600.00 2 trips/mo. for 6 months ($300/trip)

Total Cost $99,600.00 Total cost to re-enable and enhance system for one full work zone season

A-1

APPENDIX A

System Component Data Sheets

Pages 1-6 – Autoscope Duo Specification

Pages 7-16 – Field Processor

Pages 17-18 – 3-Port Switch

Pages 19 – System Trailer

Autoscope®

Duo

The Autoscope Duo sensor is a hybrid radar and

video vehicle detection system. It merges the

robust capabilities of radar and video detection

technologies for the highest levels of detection

accuracy in all traffi c, lighting, weather and road

conditions, with the lowest cost of ownership.

The Autoscope Duo sensor provides a consistent

vehicle detections solution, and inspires ITS

applications of continuous data collection and

traffi c monitoring.

The Duo Detection Module (DDM) is a detector

card that slides easily into a standard VME

chassis. It performs the decision logic process

to combine radar and video information for

optimal detector performance.

The Duo Interface Panel in the cabinet protects

other cabinet equipment from outside surges

and noise. Terminal blocks connect up to four (4)

Duo sensors. A pigtail cable assembly provides

simple connection to the Duo sensor for power,

radar, video, and zoom controls.

Integrated together, the radar and video

detection algorithms expand the benefi ts of a

non-intrusive detector. This guarantees years of

low-maintenance service and signifi cant return

on investment, especially when compared to

the recurring expense of common inductive loop

detectors.

APPLICATIONS

Adaptive, Traffi c Responsive Signalized

Junction Control Work-zone safety and traffi c control Bicycle Detection Remote video surveillance

FEATURES

Provides vehicle detection for junction stop line

and advance extension applications EasyLink connectivity for broadband

communications Streaming digital MPEG-4 video User-defi nable password protection 10x remote controlled zoom lens & color imager IP addressable for Autoscope network

management No streaking or blooming from bright light

sources such as headlights High-sensitivity for accurate detection at low

light levels Rugged, environmentally-sealed enclosure and

sunshield designed to withstand all weather

extremes Low power consumption Local language support

BENEFITS

Unprecedented high performance for above

ground detection Easy to install and confi gure Exceptional value when compared to in-ground

detection systems Reliable performance Minimal maintenance Cost-effective ITS solutions for traffi c

management

Autoscope Duo

CONTACTS

World Headquarters

500 Spruce Tree Centre1600 University Avenue WestSt. Paul, MN 55104 USAPhone: +1.651.603.7700Fax: +1.651.305.6402info@imagesensing.comimagesensing.com

Image Sensing Systems

Romania

Dobrogeanu Gherea Constantin Street10 – 12, et1, ap1Sector 1, 013764, BucharestRomania Phone +4.021.794.55.60Fax +44.021.794.55.66issro@imagesensing.comimagesensing.com

Image Sensing Systems

Germany

Unnauer Weg 7aD-50767 Köln (Cologne) GermanyPhone +49.221.30229.141Fax +49.221.30229.142koeln@imagesensing.comimagesensing.com

Image Sensing Systems

Canada

150 Bridgeland AvenueSuite 204Toronto, ON M6A 1Z5Canada Phone +1.416.785.9248Fax +1.416.785.9332

imagesensing.com

Due to ISS’ continuous efforts to develop the products that are most responsive to our customers needs, the above specifications are subject to change. To verify the current information, please visit the Image Sensing Systems website.

©2015 Image Sensing Systems, Inc. Part Number: 2270 Rev 141111

SPECIFICATION

Autoscope Duo Sensor

Power

11 to 32 VDC, 8W maximum Consumption, current 300 mA @24VDC, 8 Watts

Video Sensor

Lens: 10x zoom, 5° to 46° horizontal, 4° to

35° vertical ¼ in colour CCD, NTSC format Resolution > 470 TVL horizontal Sensitivity at lens, full video, no AGC, 3.0

Lux (typical) S/N > 50 dB

Radar

Max range (passenger car from typical mast

arm mount location) 90 m (290 ft) Total field of view: ±35° AZ; ±8° EL Max transmit power (EIRP) 20 dBm Frequency Band: 24.0—24.25 GHz Bandwidth < 100 MHz

Video Output

NTCS Composite 75Ω 1 Vpp, BNC connec-

tor

Single Integrated Duo Sensor Cable

3-wire Power Coaxial cable: video transmission Two-wire RS-485 (x2) for lens zoom control

& for radar data, command, and control

Housing & Sunshield

Lightweight, durable polycarbonate con-

struction Thermostatically controlled faceplate heater Adjustable weather and sunshield with drip

guard Weatherproof rear connector

Environmental

-40°C to +60°C (-40°F to +140°F) Video and radar sensors sealed in water-

proof and dust tight housing which meet

NEMA 4 and IP67 standards

Overall Dimensions & Weight

H x W x L

330mm x 127mm x 279mm

(13in x 5in x 11in) 2.0 Kg (4.5 lb)

Regulatory

FCC Part 15, Class A

FCC Part 15.245, EN300440 compliant

SPECIFICATION

Autoscope Duo Detection Module

Power

12 to 24 VDC, 11W maximum Consumption, current @12VDC: 11W, 900mA @24VDC: 11W, 500mA

Video

Input

PAL, CCIR, NTSC or RS170

75W Vpp, SMA connector on back Output

1 Vpp, BNC connector on front

1 Vpp, SMA connector on back

PAL or NTSC

MPEG-4 digital streaming video via Easy-

Link

Radar I/O

USB cable Type A to Interface Panel

Communications

EasyLink Ethernet 10/100 Mb/s

communication via RJ-45 connector

on front

Detector I/O Outputs (open collector, selectable

active low or high)

32 (96-pin DIN version) Inputs

16 (96-pin DIN version) Status output (open collector, active low) to

indicate card is processing

and detector I/O valid Serial I/O via EasyLink

Environmental

-34° C to +74° C (-29° F to +165° F) 0 to 95% relative humidity

Overall Dimensions & Weight

H x W x L (3U x 160 mm)

130 mm x 20 mm x 191 mm

(5.10 in x 0.80 in x 7.5 in) 0.16 kg (0.35 lb) basic unit

Regulatory

CE EN 55022, EN 61000-6-1

RoHS

Regulatory

Three-year warranty Extended warranty package to six years

IPC2 Owner’s Manual

2

IPC2 Owner’s Manual

February -2014

Introduction

Package contents

Hardware specifications

IPC2 features

Quick start guide

Connecting IPC2

Booting Linux

Booting Windows 7

Maintenance

Opening service door

Service bay

BIOS Setup Utility

Warranty and RMA

Warranty

RMA

Tips for saving power

General

In Operating System

For more information and to obtain the latest revision of this document, please visit

www.fit-pc.com

3

Introduction Package contents

1. IPC2 computer 2. Power supply: input 100-240VAC 50/60Hz, 60W output 12VDC 5A, DC plug lock, 3. Attachable Standard North-American and EU plugs AC cord. * 4. HDMI to DVI adapter 5. Audio 3.5mm to RCA cable 6. 2 WiFi antennas (in some models) 7. Mini-serial to DB9-female adapter cable

To use IPC2, you will need:

A display with DVI, HDMI or DisplayPort input + DVI, HDMI or DisplayPort cable USB keyboard and mouse

* Local resellers may supply IPC2 with other AC cord types.

Hardware specifications Processor Type Intel 4th Gen Core Celeron-2955U / i3-4010U / i5-4300U / i7-4600U

(Haswell)

Cores 64-bit dual core Clock speed 1.4-2.1GHz (turbo boost up to 3.3GHz) (depends on CPU) TDP 15W Chipset Mobile Intel 8 Series (Lynx Point) in MCP package Memory Supported 2x SO-DIMM 204-pin DDR3L SDRAM memory slots

Up to 16GB (2x 8GB) DDR3L-1600 (1.35V only) Storage Supported 1x SATA up to 6 Gbps (SATA 3.0) for internal 2.5” HDD/SSD

2x mSATA slot up to 6 Gbps (SATA 3.0) Graphics GPU Intel HD 4400 Graphics

Triple display mode supported Display Interface 1 HDMI 1.4a up to 4096 x 2304 @ 24 Hz Display Interface 2 DisplayPort 1.2 up to 3200 x 2000 @ 60 Hz Display Interface 3 HDMI 1.4a up to 4096 x 2304 @ 24 Hz Audio Codec Realtek ALC888-VC2 HD audio codec Audio Output Analog stereo output

Digital 7.1+2 channels S/PDIF output 3.5mm jack

Audio Input Analog stereo Microphone input Digital S/PDIF input 3.5mm jack

4

Networking LAN 2x GbE LAN ports

LAN1: Intel I218 GbE PHY (MAC integrated into the chipset) (RJ-45) LAN2: Intel I211 GbE controller (RJ-45)

Wireless WLAN 802.11ac (2.4/5GHz dual band Intel 7260HMW) Bluetooth 4.0

Connectivity USB 4x USB 3.0

2x USB 2.0 Serial 3x Serial communication ports

COM0: Full RS232 via mini serial connector COM1: 2-wire RS232 via mini serial connector COM3: 2-wire RS232 via mini serial connector

SIM 1x micro SIM slot (6 pins)4 Special I/O N/A Expansion Half-size mini-PCIe socket

Full-size mini-PCIe socket2 Advanced Technologies vPRO Yes (Intel vPRO Technology)5 AMT Yes (Intel Active Management Technology)5 CPU Virtualization Yes Special Functionality Auto-On

Wake-on-LAN Wake-on-Timer PXE Boot Watchdog

Operating System Supported Windows 7/8, 32-bit and 64-bit

Linux 32-bit and 64-bit Embedded OS

Operating Conditions Input Voltage Unregulated 10 – 15VDC input1 Power Consumption 6W – 24W Operating Temperature 1. Commercial

HDD models: 0°C – 50°C SSD models: 0°C – 70°C 2. Extended (TE) SSD models only: -20°C – 70°C 3. Industrial (TI) SSD models only: -40°C – 70°C

Enclosure Material Die Cast Aluminum Cooling Passive Cooling Fanless Design Dimensions 19cm x 16cm x 4cm Weight 1150gr Package Warranty 5 years3 Notes 1. Nominal input voltage: 12V

2. Shared with mSATA 3. For products purchased since 1-Jan-2013 4. For use with mini PCIe Cellular Modem module 5. Supported on LAN1 only

5

IPC2 features

Front panel The features of the front panel of IPC2 depend on specific FACE Module used and are documented separately.

Power IPC2 has a tactile power push-button. It is used for turning on/off the PC and for standby/resume when supported by the operating system. A push of at least 5 seconds will always turn off the IPC2.

Display IPC2 has triple display interface with support for triple head.

1. 2x HDMI with audio support 2. 1x DisplayPort

To connect IPC2 to a DVI display, use the provided HDMI to DVI-D adapter. Use a DVI cable to connect the adapter to the display.

Audio There are 2 standard 3.5mm jacks on the back panel. Right:

Stereo line-in using a standard 3.5mm plug S/PDIF 7.1 in using provided cable

Left: Stereo line-out using a standard 3.5mm plug S/PDIF 7.1 out using provided cable

6

LAN IPC2 features two 10/100/1000BaseT Ethernet ports using standard RJ45 connectors. Use a standard Ethernet cables to connect. The connectors feature built-in LEDs that are lit when a connection is detected.

WLAN 2 WLAN antennas are supplied in models with integrated WiFi and should be screwed into the standard SMA connectors.

USB There are 2 USB 3.0 ports (5 Gbps) and 2 USB 2.0 ports on the back panel. And additional 2 USB3.0 ports on the front panel. All USB ports support current up to 1A. Ports on the back are upside down – note when connecting USB plugs.

Serial port Three RS232 mini-serial ports is located on the back panel. Mini-serial to DB9 cable to connect to standard serial devices is supplied in the package.

7

Quick start guide Connecting IPC2

Turn off the display and connect it to the IPC2 HDMI connector (use the HDMI to DVI adapter if needed).

Connect the USB keyboard and mouse to USB 2 connectors. Plug the Ethernet cable into the Ethernet connector. In IPC2 models with WiFi: Mount the WiFi Antennas on the SMA connector by turning it clockwise

repeatedly until the antenna holds firm. Insert the DC plug into the IPC2 DC-in jack. Rotate clockwise 900 to secure.

Plug the speakers into the line-out jack. Connect the power supply to the AC cord and plug the cord into AC outlet. The front panel logo

should light up as the IPC2 boots.

Booting Linux Linux loads automatically on power up. Upon boot you will be guided through the Linux Mint first-boot setup procedure.

Booting Windows 7 Upon first power-up, you will be guided through the Windows Welcome procedure which is self-explanatory. The Windows 7 serial number is printed on the Windows 7 label on the bottom of your IPC2.

8

Maintenance IPC2 requires no maintenance. You should not take the IPC2 apart other than opening the service door. Taking IPC2 apart will void its warranty. The following operations can be conducted by the user:

Opening service door

1. Unscrew marked Philips screw at the bottom to release service-door. 2. Slide out service-door until it stops – about 10 mm. 3. Service-door is now detached. Lift edge of service-door to completely remove.

Re-assemble in reverse order. Hard disk connects by sliding-in the service-door.

Service bay

The service-bay provides easy access to hard-disk, RAM, and mini-PCIe sockets incl. WLAN module. Hard disk is 2.5” 7mm/9.5mm SATA. It is screwed to service door by 4 screws, 2 on each side. It is recommended to use 5400 RPM hard disk or SSD. 7200 RPM or higher is not recommended due to higher power consumption and risk of overheating.

RAM – use DDR3L-1333/1600 SO-DIMM modules.

Mini-PCIe – the half-size mini-PCIe is normally used for WLAN. If you remove the WLAN module make sure to isolate the ends of antenna cables with some tape to avoid short-circuit. The full-size mini PCIe is available for any use.

9

BIOS Setup Utility Entering BIOS Setup Utility Turn off the IPC2. Turn on while holding down the F2 key. See http://www.fit-pc.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page.

Warranty and RMA Warranty

CompuLab guarantees products against defects in workmanship and material for a period of 60 months from the date of shipment.

Your sole remedy and CompuLab’s sole liability shall be for CompuLab, at its sole discretion, to either repair or replace the defective product at no charge.

This warranty is void if the product has been altered or damaged by accident, misuse or abuse.

RMA Keep the original package for shipping in case of hardware failure. In case of HW failure of an IPC2 under warranty, please contact the seller of that IPC2. Please provide the following required information:

IPC2 serial number Name of purchaser Address Problem description

If the IPC2 was purchased directly from CompuLab, please email rma@fit-pc.com.

Tips for saving power General

Working without a connected display automatically disables the graphics controller – saving power.

Disconnect external USB devices when not in use.

In Operating System Use power scheme as follows

Turn of monitor after several minutes not in use Turn off hard disk after several minutes not in use System standby after an hour not in use

10

IPC2 Manufacturer: CompuLab Ltd. This device complies with Part 15 of the FCC Rules. Operation is subject to the following two conditions: (1) This device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) This device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation. Statement Changes or modifications to this equipment not expressly approved by the party responsible for compliance (CompuLab Ltd.) could void the user’s authority to operate the equipment.

Statement NOTE: This equipment has been tested and found to comply with the limits for a Class B digital device, pursuant to part 15 of the FCC Rules. These limits are designed to provide reasonable protection against harmful interference in a residential installation. This equipment generates, uses and can radiate radio frequency energy and, if not installed and used in accordance with the instructions, may cause harmful interference to radio communications. However, there is no guarantee that interference will not occur in a particular installation. If this equipment does cause harmful interference to radio or television reception, which can be determined by turning the equipment off and on, the user is encouraged to try to correct the interference by one or more of the following measures: -Reorient or relocate the receiving antenna. -Increase the separation between the equipment and receiver. -Connect the equipment into an outlet on a circuit different from that to which the receiver is connected. -Consult the dealer or an experienced radio/TV technician for help.

CyberData Corporation 3 Justin Court, Monterey, CA 93940 831.373.2601 Fax: 831.373.4193 www.cyberdata.net

The IP Endpoint Company

The IP Endpoint Company3-Port Gigabit Ethernet Switch

Features3-port auto-negotiating (no crossover cable required)10/100/1000 full duplex USB or PS/2 mouse-powered (no external power supply required)Link/Status and connection speed LEDsLow powerVLAN Packet ForwardingRoHS compliantUSB A to B cable included

The CyberData 3-Port Gigabit Ethernet

Switch enables users of a PC to split a single

Gigabit Ethernet port into two Gigabit

Ethernet ports. The power for the switch is

supplied by the PC’s USB port.

Technical DetailsAll ports are 10/100/1000 Mbps auto sensing based upon the port's individual connectionEach port has auto MDX - any port can be used as the uplink connection Fully compliant to IEEE 802.3u standardAutomatic address learning, address aging and address migrationIntegrated lookup engine with 1k unicast MAC addresses 1.4Gbps high performance memory bandwidthCustom QOS and VLAN settings available

Specifications

Dimensions 2.75” L x 3.78” W x 1.1” H

Ports 3 x RJ45, 1 x USB-B

Warranty

011236Part Number

Standards IEEE 802.3u

Modes 10BASE-T, 100BASE-T, 1000BASE-T

Power 350 mA at 5 volts

LEDs Link/Status and Connection Speed

2 years

Unit Weight 0.2 lbs.

Operating temp.

(supplied by either an USB or PS/2 port)

0.3 lbs.Boxed Weight

-10o C to 50o C (14o F to 122o F)

S ifi ti

Ethernet Access

USB(B)

USB(A)

Ethernet

Ethernet Switch

Computer

CyberData Corporation 3 Justin Court, Monterey, CA 93940 831.373.2601 Fax: 831.373.4193 www.cyberdata.net 930656D/140617

PEEL OFFADHESIVE BACKING

ATTACHTO WALL

Ethernet

USB A to B

Ethernet Access

Mounting

Second DeviceNo Power Supply Required

No Power Supply Required

3-Port Gigabit Ethernet Switch

Typical Installation

Trailer – Trafcon LX-PEP Manufactured by: Trafcon Industries Inc. Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Dimensions • Length - 14' • Width - 7' • Tongue- A-Frame • Frame - Heavy gauge steel tubing and structural channel • Battery Enclosure - Low density thermoplastic with lockable lid(s) • Fenders - Low density thermoplastic with splash shields • Safety Chains - 24" x 1/4" proof coil plated chain with hooks • Outriggers - (4) Extend 30" each from trailer frame • Leveling Jacks - (5) H.D. screw type jacks • Trailer Hitch - 2" ball or pintle ring • Axle - 3,500 LB capacity • Springs - 4 leaf, double eye • 14” Tires and wheels • Track Width - 71" • Weight - 1,400 LBs. to 1,800 LBs (depending on specifications) • Powder coat finish - Safety Orange, custom colors available Pedestal • Pedestal - H.D. 6" diameter receiver tube • Tilt - 90° tilt and lock via 1,000 LB manual winch • Rotation - 360° manual rotation Mast • Height - 31' standard (extensions up to 40' available) • Material - H.D. Galvanized steel tubing • Segments - (3) at 10' each • Raise/Lower - 1,000 LB Manual winch (1,500 LB electric hoist available) Solar Charging System • 55w - 440w solar array available • Solid State charge controller • Low voltage disconnect • Solar Panels Tilt & Rotate Power Supply/Battery • Batteries - 2 to 12 GC-2 deep cycle 6v available • Voltage - 12 VDC output • AC Charge - 30 Amp to 75 Amp chargers available

B-1

APPENDIX B

MSP Responses on Comment Sheets

Please Contact:

Rashmi Brewer or Dan Nelson

MnDOT Project Manager AECOM Project Consultant

651‐234‐7063 612‐376‐2061

Rashmi.Brewer@state.mn.us dan.nelson@aecom.com

Questions?

Was Inclement Weather Present? 

(Circle / underline one)Yes     /     No

Please describe any issues you observed 

in the operation of the ESC4WZ System 

here. 

Was not able to view the website using Firefox or Internet Explorer. 

Please note any additional comments / 

observations on the ESC4WZ System 

here.

Time Period of Enforcement: 0630‐0830

State Patrol Observation Worksheet for                                                   

Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Officer Name: YANG SP362

Date of Enforcement 7/25/2016

Please Contact:

Rashmi Brewer or Dan Nelson

MnDOT Project Manager AECOM Project Consultant

651‐234‐7063 612‐376‐2061

Rashmi.Brewer@state.mn.us dan.nelson@aecom.com

Questions?

Was Inclement Weather Present? 

(Circle / underline one)  No

Today, I was able to log into the system.  I found the system fairly 

accurate with the speeds.  I found due to the location the speeds were 

off about 3 to 5MPH when I was able to clock them.  I watched the live 

screen, and I coud see which vehicles were speeding with the speeds on 

them.  Issues I observed with it today, was that there woud be times it 

would not create a video when there were multiple vehicles in the area.  

Also, when the vehicle was speeding at a high rate of speed, it would 

capture it at highest speed which sometimes created a difficult time to 

make out a video.  

Please note any additional comments / 

observations on the ESC4WZ System 

here.

There were also times when a vehicle hit the trigger speed, there would 

no video created. When i first started the time between vehicles crossed 

over the camera, and when they reached me was very far.  There was a 

delay in the system, but i moved closer, and i was able to cut the delay 

down.  I started at 1/2 mile from the camera, and it was too far away.  I 

moved to a quarter mile away from the camera, and it significantly cut 

the time down.  It was just difficult to find a decent spot to get a good 

lase on the vehicles due to the curve.

Please describe any issues you observed 

in the operation of the ESC4WZ System 

here. 

Time Period of Enforcement: 0700 TO 0900

State Patrol Observation Worksheet for                                                   

Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Officer Name: CHRIS O'SHEA

Date of Enforcement 7/26/2016

Please Contact:

Rashmi Brewer or Dan Nelson

MnDOT Project Manager AECOM Project Consultant

651‐234‐7063 612‐376‐2061

Rashmi.Brewer@state.mn.us dan.nelson@aecom.com

Questions?

Was Inclement Weather Present? 

(Circle / underline one)   No

Please describe any issues you observed 

in the operation of the ESC4WZ System 

here. 

Posted speed limit is 55 mph, however the system is set for 60 mph as 

the posted limit.  These isn't a good spot to clock vehicles as they come 

through this zone.  I sat north of the zone and had to stand outside my 

vehicle to clock cars, while trying to watch the live stream to view 

speeds, etc.  ‐ this was not effective.  I sat inside the construction zone 

and tried to verify speeds but it was ineffective due to a lack of space 

and the inability to shoot the laser over the concrete barriers.  I also 

removed my laptop from the dock and stood outside my vehicle in an 

attempt to verify speeds but that was also ineffective.  I was too visible 

and vehicles would quickly brake.  I would move down the zone to avoid 

that issue but then I was too far away and the speeds were inconsistent.   

Please note any additional comments / 

observations on the ESC4WZ System 

here.

**  Suggestion ‐ construct some type of barrier (construction type of 

shelter) where Troopers could stand/sit in that is very close to your 

device.  This would allow Troopers to clock vechicles covertly and 

accurately while viewing the live stream.   

Time Period of Enforcement:      0630‐0830 

State Patrol Observation Worksheet for                                                   

Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Officer Name:     Scott Rudeen, SP114

Date of Enforcement     07/28/16 

Please Contact:

Rashmi Brewer or Dan Nelson

MnDOT Project Manager AECOM Project Consultant

651‐234‐7063 612‐376‐2061

Rashmi.Brewer@state.mn.us dan.nelson@aecom.com

Time Period of Enforcement:      0630‐0930 

State Patrol Observation Worksheet for                                        

Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Officer Name:        Scott Rudeen 

Date of Enforcement     07/29/16 

Questions?

Was Inclement Weather Present? 

(Circle / underline one)No

Please describe any issues you observed 

in the operation of the ESC4WZ System 

here. 

See email from July 29th by Dan Nelson

Please note any additional comments / 

observations on the ESC4WZ System 

here.

See email from July 29th by Dan Nelson

Please Contact:

Rashmi Brewer or Dan Nelson

MnDOT Project Manager AECOM Project Consultant

651‐234‐7063 612‐376‐2061

Rashmi.Brewer@state.mn.us dan.nelson@aecom.com

Time Period of Enforcement: 0630HRS‐0830HRS 

State Patrol Observation Worksheet for                                                   

Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Officer Name: KENDALL LEMAY SP 511

Date of Enforcement 8/8/2016

Questions?

Was Inclement Weather Present? 

(Circle / underline one)Yes     /     No

Please describe any issues you observed 

in the operation of the ESC4WZ System 

here. 

NO ISSUES WITH SYSTEM 

Please note any additional comments / 

observations on the ESC4WZ System 

here.

I STOPPED 1 VEHICLE FOR SPEED 84MPH THAT WAS NOT PICKED UP BY 

THE CAMERA SYSTEM. 

Please Contact:

Rashmi Brewer or Dan Nelson

MnDOT Project Manager AECOM Project Consultant

651‐234‐7063 612‐376‐2061

Rashmi.Brewer@state.mn.us dan.nelson@aecom.com

Time Period of Enforcement: 0630HRS‐0830HRS

State Patrol Observation Worksheet for                                                   

Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Officer Name: KENDALL LEMAY SP 511

Date of Enforcement 8/9/2016

Questions?

Was Inclement Weather Present? 

(Circle / underline one)Yes     /     No

Please describe any issues you observed 

in the operation of the ESC4WZ System 

here. 

NO ISSUES 

Please note any additional comments / 

observations on the ESC4WZ System 

here.

I found the ESC4WZ software to be extremely easy to operate with no 

malfunctions transferring to my squad laptop. I found the system to be a 

great tool for enhancing speed enforcement. The ESC4WZ was as 

accurate as my Lidar and Radar Units. 

Please Contact:

Rashmi Brewer or Dan Nelson

MnDOT Project Manager AECOM Project Consultant

651‐234‐7063 612‐376‐2061

Rashmi.Brewer@state.mn.us dan.nelson@aecom.com

Time Period of Enforcement:      0630‐0830 

State Patrol Observation Worksheet for                                                   

Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Officer Name:        Scott Rudeen 

Date of Enforcement     08/11/16 

Questions?

Was Inclement Weather Present? 

(Circle / underline one)Yes ‐ rain  

Please describe any issues you observed 

in the operation of the ESC4WZ System 

here. 

 The speed limit is still set at 55 MPH.  Previous emails, etc. state that 

the speed limit should be 60 MPH.    The live system settings have been 

changed.  The speed limit is set at 55 MPH (which is accurate to what 

the road signs say) and the trigger speed is now set at 75 MPH.  Is this 

what you want it set at?    Also, there is no where to sit north of CR J 

where we can effectively utilize our Laser in order to clock the speeds of 

vehicles.   As mentioned in previous emails, it would be best if we can 

get some Class 5 rock, etc. put down for us about 1/3 to 1/2 mile north 

of CR J on the right shoulder so we can sit perpendicular and clock 

vehicles.                                                                                                                     

Please note any additional comments / 

observations on the ESC4WZ System 

here.

Conflicting goals.  The below quotes want us to do two different things.  

One is to sit north of CR J and clock/stop vehicles and enforce the speed 

limit, while the other is implying we should sit south of CR J in hopes of 

slowing down traffic just before they enter the zone to see if our 

presence has an effect on their speed.          "Basically you will be using 

this system as an advanced warning or “heads up” notification that a 

speeder is coming up to you" "The goal with having a trooper on site is 

to measure the impact it on traffic speed with a trooper on site vs. none. 

This machine will collect that data and create speed profile graphs to 

gauge the impact."                

Please Contact:

Rashmi Brewer or Dan Nelson

MnDOT Project Manager AECOM Project Consultant

651‐234‐7063 612‐376‐2061

Rashmi.Brewer@state.mn.us dan.nelson@aecom.com

Time Period of Enforcement:      0630‐0930 

State Patrol Observation Worksheet for                                           

Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Officer Name:        Scott Rudeen 

Date of Enforcement     08/12/16 

Questions?

Was Inclement Weather Present? 

(Circle / underline one)No

Please describe any issues you 

observed in the operation of the 

ESC4WZ System here. 

See email from Aug. 12th by Dan Nelson

Please note any additional comments 

/ observations on the ESC4WZ 

System here.

See email from Aug. 12th by Dan Nelson

Please Contact:

Rashmi Brewer or Dan Nelson

MnDOT Project Manager AECOM Project Consultant

651‐234‐7063 612‐376‐2061

Rashmi.Brewer@state.mn.us dan.nelson@aecom.com

Time Period of Enforcement:      0630‐0830 

State Patrol Observation Worksheet for                                                   

Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Officer Name:     Scott Rudeen, SP114

Date of Enforcement     08/29/16 

Questions?

Was Inclement Weather Present? 

(Circle / underline one)   No

Please describe any issues you observed 

in the operation of the ESC4WZ System 

here. 

Posted speed limit in the beginning of the work zone is at 60 MPH and 

then is at 55 MPH for the rest of the zone.   This might cause some 

confusion.   The system worked well off and on ‐ audio was only heard 

on a few alerts and I observed trigger speeds but some of those trigger 

speeds were not recorded and did not provide an alert.  The class V rock 

area on the left shoulder does not allow us to shoot laser.  We can not 

shoot laser over the concrete barriers.  As mentioned in previous 

communications, the best spot for us is on the right shoulder where 

there are no barriers restricting the use of laser.   

Please note any additional comments / 

observations on the ESC4WZ System 

here.

  I sat on the right shoulder at the end of the work zone and timed 

vehicles from where I could watch them on the live video to where I 

could actually see them and clock them.  This time period was 

approximately 25‐30 seconds for most vehicles. 

Please Contact:

Rashmi Brewer or Dan Nelson

MnDOT Project Manager AECOM Project Consultant

651‐234‐7063 612‐376‐2061

Rashmi.Brewer@state.mn.us dan.nelson@aecom.com

Time Period of Enforcement:      0630‐0830 

State Patrol Observation Worksheet for                                                   

Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Officer Name:        Scott Rudeen 

Date of Enforcement     08/30/16 

Questions?

Was Inclement Weather Present? 

(Circle / underline one) 

Please describe any issues you observed 

in the operation of the ESC4WZ System 

here. 

 60 MPH signs are at CR E and CR 96, then just north of CR 96 it changes 

to a 55 MPH sign and it stays 55 throughout the rest of the work zone ‐ 

this will probably cause confusion.  Would be best if the speed was 

consistent throughout the work zone.                                                                 

Please note any additional comments / 

observations on the ESC4WZ System 

here.

Posted: 55 MPH. Trigger: 65 MPH. From approximately 0650 to 0815 

hours I sat in the center median about 3/4 mile south of CR J.  No lights 

on and my squad was positioned northbound so traffic approaching me 

would see the rear of my squad car.   Please evaluate the speeds of 

vehicles coming through CR J area during this time period to see if my 

presence had any effect.    Tomorrow I will turn on my rear deck lights, 

so as traffic approaches me, they will see my rear lights and then you 

can determine the effect of their speeds through the CR J zone with my 

lights on vs. no lights on.  

Please Contact:

Rashmi Brewer or Dan Nelson

MnDOT Project Manager AECOM Project Consultant

651‐234‐7063 612‐376‐2061

Rashmi.Brewer@state.mn.us dan.nelson@aecom.com

Time Period of Enforcement:      0630‐0830 

State Patrol Observation Worksheet for                                                   

Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Officer Name:        Scott Rudeen 

Date of Enforcement     09/01/16 

Questions?

Was Inclement Weather Present? 

(Circle / underline one) 

Please describe any issues you observed 

in the operation of the ESC4WZ System 

here. 

 60 MPH signs are now throughout this work zone.                                          

Please note any additional comments / 

observations on the ESC4WZ System 

here.

Posted: 40 MPH. Trigger: 70 MPH. From approximately 0650 to 0815 

hours I sat in the center median just south of Hwy 96.  This area is a long 

straight area that allowed oncoming vehicles to see me from a good 

distance away.  I noticed more vehicles today hitting the trigger speed of 

70 + MPH than I did yesterday when I was a lot closer to CR J. Please 

evaluate the speed of vehicles during this time period to see if my rear 

lights had an effect on vehicle speeds.    

Please Contact:

Rashmi Brewer or Dan Nelson

MnDOT Project Manager AECOM Project Consultant

651‐234‐7063 612‐376‐2061

Rashmi.Brewer@state.mn.us dan.nelson@aecom.com

Questions?

Was Inclement Weather Present? 

(Circle / underline one) 

Please describe any issues you observed 

in the operation of the ESC4WZ System 

here. 

 The speed sign just south of CR J is covered up.  This is the last sign 

before the target area.  This sign should get fixed so it doesn't cause 

confusion.                                                                                                                  

Please note any additional comments / 

observations on the ESC4WZ System 

here.

No issues in the zone.  Except the inability to effectively utilize my laser 

to clock speeding vehicles.   The class V rock that was placed on the left 

shoulder is not effective as I am not able to shoot vehicles with my laser 

due to the concrete construction barriers.  

Time Period of Enforcement:      0630‐0830 

State Patrol Observation Worksheet for                                                   

Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Officer Name:        Scott Rudeen 

Date of Enforcement     09/02/16 

Please Contact:

Rashmi Brewer or Dan Nelson

MnDOT Project Manager AECOM Project Consultant

651‐234‐7063 612‐376‐2061

Rashmi.Brewer@state.mn.us dan.nelson@aecom.com

Time Period of Enforcement:      0630‐0830 

State Patrol Observation Worksheet for                                                   

Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Officer Name:        Scott Rudeen 

Date of Enforcement     09/14/16 

Questions?

Was Inclement Weather Present? 

(Circle / underline one) 

Please describe any issues you observed 

in the operation of the ESC4WZ System 

here. 

 I marked 5 concrete barriers with a green X about 1/4 to 1/3 mile south 

of the designated class 5 rock area) ‐ these 5 could be removed, if 

possible, in order to have a better visual (with laser gun) on traffic 

approaching in order to clock speeding vehicles.                                               

Please note any additional comments / 

observations on the ESC4WZ System 

here.

  

Please Contact:

Rashmi Brewer or Dan Nelson

MnDOT Project Manager AECOM Project Consultant

651‐234‐7063 612‐376‐2061

Rashmi.Brewer@state.mn.us dan.nelson@aecom.com

Time Period of Enforcement:      0630‐0830 

State Patrol Observation Worksheet for                                                   

Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Officer Name:        Scott Rudeen 

Date of Enforcement     09/15/16 

Questions?

Was Inclement Weather Present? 

(Circle / underline one) 

Please describe any issues you observed 

in the operation of the ESC4WZ System 

here. 

 I scouted out this zone in hopes of finding a safe and effective location 

that two Troopers could work speed.  I first looked to see if there was a 

spot inside the construction zone for a second Trooper to sit and clock 

vehicles ‐ this doesn't exist.  I then looked at the CR J and CR H2 

overpasses ‐ neither of these locations provides a spot for a second 

Trooper to sit to shoot laser.  I then looked at the shoulders in this 

location ‐ there are no safe shoulders that would allow a Trooper to 

safely and effectively sit and shoot laser and/or safely pull out from to 

chase down a violator.                                                                                            

Please note any additional comments / 

observations on the ESC4WZ System 

here.

  

Please Contact:

Rashmi Brewer or Dan Nelson

MnDOT Project Manager AECOM Project Consultant

651‐234‐7063 612‐376‐2061

Rashmi.Brewer@state.mn.us dan.nelson@aecom.com

Time Period of Enforcement:      0630‐0830 

State Patrol Observation Worksheet for                                                   

Enhanced Speed Compliance for Work Zones (ESC4WZ) System

Officer Name:        Scott Rudeen 

Date of Enforcement     09/16/16 

Questions?

Was Inclement Weather Present? 

(Circle / underline one)No  

Please describe any issues you observed 

in the operation of the ESC4WZ System 

here. 

 I scouted out this zone in hopes of finding a safe and effective location 

that two Troopers could work speed. I looked at the CR J ramps (both NB 

and SB ramps).  The SB ramp is ineffective but the NB ramp I was able to 

effectively clock vehicles using my laser.  The challenge with this location 

is relaying the violator vehicle informatoin to the other Trooper due to a 

lack of sight line. We would not be utilzing the live system either, which 

defeats the purpose of this project.                                                                      

Please note any additional comments / 

observations on the ESC4WZ System 

here.

  I then looked at the center median area (gravel crossover, constructoin 

shed, and the area closer to CR J).  The only location inside the 

construction area would be between the construction shed and the CR J 

overpass (actually closer to CR J).  I was able to effectively clock vehicles 

with my laser.  The disadvantages are relaying the correct violator 

vehicle information due to lack of sight line and we would not be 

utilizing the live system.