Notes
Slide Show
Outline
1
Baselining Current
Road Weather Information

Road Weather Management Stakeholder Meeting
September 9, 2011
2
Project Background
  • FHWA Road Weather Management Program
    • Contract:  DTFH61-06-D00006, Task Order 2


    • Initial study conducted from August 2007 - June 2009
    • Report:   FHWA-JPO-09-055, June 2009


    • Follow-up study conducted from August 2009 – January 2011
    • Report:  FHWA-JPO-11-018, January 2011


    • COTM:  Dr. Roemer Alfelor
3
Project Objectives

  • To characterize the availability and quality of road weather information focusing on the information content and usefulness.
  • To serve as a baseline for future comparisons of enhanced road weather information enabled by the Clarus system and other advanced road weather management technologies.
  • To recommend a strategy for future monitoring of road weather information quality
4
Methodology
  • Characterize Available Road Weather Information
    • Scan Road Weather Information Sources
    • Characterize Road Weather Information
  • Develop Baselining and Comparison Procedures
  • 2008 Survey
    • Design survey
    • Survey DOT transportation managers (Advisory, Control, Treatment)
    • Analyze and report results
  • 2009 Survey
    • Refine survey
    • Survey DOT transportation managers (Advisory, Control, Treatment)
    • Analyze and report results



5
Road Weather Products
6
Road Weather Elements
7
NWS Current Weather
  • Elements
    • Air Temp
    • Dew Point
    • RH
    • Wind Dir & Speed
    • Weather
    • Precipitation type & amount
8
ESS Current Weather
9
Product Components
10
Product Components
  • 14 Products (2008 survey)
  • 37 Elements (2008 survey)


  • 92 Product Components  (2010 survey)


11
Quality Assessment
  • Quality Attributes
    • Accuracy
    • Completeness
    • Relevance
    • Latency
    • Reliability
    • Ease of use


    • Composite average of six attributes


  • Importance
12
Quality Attribute Question
13
Computation of Results
  • STEPS
  • List Likert scores for each Product Component by Attribute
  • Calculate statistics
    • Number of responses
    • Average (mean)
    • Median
    • Standard deviation
    • Range
14
 
15
Interpreting Results - Averages
16
Interpreting Results - Rankings
17
Interpreting Results - Rankings
18
Key Findings
  • Pavement Weather Forecasts
    • Highest rated resource
    • Overall quality attribute ratings were high
  • Watches and Warnings
    • Second in importance and overall quality rating
  • Camera Imagery
    • High in importance
    • High in accuracy and currency
  • Radar
    • Timely and reasonably accurate
    • Derived services need improvement
19
Key Findings
  • ESS Observations
    • Lower level of importance
    • Issues with accuracy, timeliness, and reliability
  • Road Weather Alerts
    • Important to users
    • Users disappointed with content and timeliness
  • Road Condition Reports
    • Average level of importance
    • Issues appear in most quality attributes
20
2008 – 2010 Results Comparison
  • ELEMENTS
  • Advisory - averages increased by 0.54
  • Control – averages increased by 0.54
  • Treatment – averages increased by 0.08
  • PRODUCTS
  • Advisory - averages decreased by 0.19
  • Control – averages increased by 0.34
  • Treatment – averages decreased by 0.08
21
General Findings
  • Perceived quality is “good” – Likert score of 4
  • Attributes needing weather support emphasis:
    • Accuracy
    • Ease of Use
  • Differences between user expectations and perceived quality are affected by:
    • Sensor performance
    • Forecast accuracy
    • Complexity of ‘abstract’ secondary formats
  • Human factors have an important influence on the estimation of quality
22
Recommendations
  • Sample Size
    • Increase the number of participants
    • Expand the sampled community
  • Length of Survey
    • Separate into survey components
    • Perform series of shorter survey components
  • Survey Clarity
    • Use example of product at beginning of each section
    • Simplify questions
23
Program Recommendation
  • FHWA Road Weather Management Program should…
    • Have oversight of an ongoing quality “monitoring” program
    • Establish a road weather information quality attribute database that is periodically updated
    • Guide an open dialog of the monitoring process at appropriate road weather stakeholder community meetings

24
Contact Information
  • Dr. Roemer Alfelor  -  FHWA Road Weather Management Program
  •     Roemer.Alfelor@dot.gov


  • Bob Hart  -  Meridian Environmental Technology, Inc.
  •     bobhart@meridian-enviro.com
  • Leon Osborne  -  Meridian Environmental Technology, Inc.
  •     leono@meridian-enviro.com