Poll & Prediction: Autonomous Car Equipment at 5k by 2019

[DrWho]

"If all the vehicles were evenly spaced at the same speed capacity would be much higher."

Dave, the scientists studying transportation have concluded otherwise....and this is assuming ideal models. It's hard to find that study right now because Illinois just raised their limits from to 70mph. All the search results are coming up on that instead...

You're simply looking at way too narrow of a model. In Houston the interstate empties onto feeders and then from feeders to normal roads, and eventually every car parks somewhere. You can't have people driving 70mph into a parking space, which means you can't have people driving 70 mph on the normal roads, which means you can't have people driving 70 mph on the feeders. If every car on the road was evenly spaced, and driving the same speed, then it would be very slow going...

Bad traffic happens because the throughput on the smaller roads backs up onto the interstates. The lanes closer to the exits go slower, but you don't want to slow down the outside lanes. Trying to use your brute force model, if the outside lane is at the minimum safe distance for the max speed, then now there is no room for cars to merge into that lane. There is also no room for cars to merge out of the left lane either. Someone has to drive slower than the cars in their lane to allow merging. Once this happens, you get a ripple of cars slowing down...ultimately resulting in cars stopping several miles back, which is due to the reaction latency. That latency could only be shorter for AVs if they're talking to each other, but now you lose the gaps that would otherwise be created for merging. You might be able to net a 3-4% improvement, but that's not "much" in my mind.

I walked through this model real fast, but studies like this are conducted frequently for different metropolitan areas. The conclusions are always the same: not enough road, and things weren't laid out properly. Redesigning cities isn't exactly an option either, and new cities can't afford the infrastructure until it's too late. The socio-economic factors play a much larger role in the growth of a city and its early planning.

I think Elon Musk and others like him are investigating way better commuter transportation models. You're trying to use your AV hammer to nail every problem and there are simply better solutions that cost less and are way fricken simpler.

Edited April 6, 2015 by DrWho

[Mallette]

Estimates I've read say we have at least 5X capacity for AVs.  It's one of the reasons I've come to believe that when government at all levels wakes up to the potential there will be serious incentives to convert people ASAP.

 

I'll bet there'd still be savings left if all construction money except that required to complete what is in progress were shifted towards subsidizing AV technology. 

 

As I mentioned earlier, even old two lane highways converted to exclusively autonomous would have great increased capacities.  When ALL vehicles are cooperating, know in advance what others up and down the line are going to do, and brake or accelerate as a unit extraordinary capacities are available. 

 

Yeah, I know..."not in my lifetime."  I beg to differ.  It simply isn't that hard, especially given the incredible ROI.  The Eisenhower Interstate system was a massive leap.  This won't be that big in regards to investment as the returns outweigh the cost.  But the impact will be far greater.

 

Dave

Edited April 4, 2015 by Mallette

[Travis In Austin]

It requires connectivity and a system that is standard across brands. It will take longer to develop and implement than individual Autonomous vehicles being commercially available and may require legislation to mandate the means of connectivity and the standard system. A designated lane provides the incentive to purchase a compatable vehicle. However, once the lane becomes overloaded with vehicles the advantage becomes less and less until another lane is added.

I've mentioned more than once that there will be a time of confusion and much to be worked out over a few years. As we tend to be reactive rather than proactive it's likely to be pretty chaotic for a while and nothing will operate as efficiently as it might. I understand now that you were speaking of manually driven vehicles. Automated vehicles will always create a gap to for another to merge (unlike Houston drivers who tend to try to cut off a merging care or one trying to change lanes) and there will be no slower vehicle holding things up unless there is a safety issue requiring all vehicles to move more slowly.

I was talking to the PAW last night about there being certain old Federal two lane or four lane roads that would make ideal AV-only routes since AV's don't need all the space on freeways or all the complexities required to keep human drivers from hitting each other. AVs could maintain freeway speeds readily on those old roads, many of which are in excellent condition being built "like they used to."

And, yes, most of those in the technology say our road system is way overbuilt by AV standards. I happen to "enjoy" a Houston commute that is one of the lightest in the area. However, I note that it is often clusters of vehicles separated by reasonably open areas as nobody is doing anything consistently. If all the vehicles were evenly spaced at the same speed capacity would be much higher.

Dave

That is the theory of coupling, instead of inconsistent gaps between cars, about one car length between vehicle, moving in synch down the road.

I figured they would design some system to allow merging in and out of the lanes.

The demo in the 90s was funded by fed govt. to partner with research universities and progam was cut.

However, there are now at least 5 "test bed" locations in about 4 states.

Who brings up a good point, every commute starts at zero, up to whatever highway speed, and back to zero. The delay is always backed up traffic trying to exit and enter freeways. Thise lights that only allow one vehicle at a time to enter freeway has been more effective then anything I have seen because, as Dave has said, individuals can't seem to regulate themselves for common good.

controled freeway access is like the air traffic control model, and ATC is not really that far off base from what they are could achieve with AVs.

Where coupling would work is for traffic that wishes to go through city, like Katy freeway, designated lane, right through Houston, or a giant parking lot with light rail or shuttles to downtown.

Texas has been using a toll way model, 130 that bypasses Austin, originally 85 mph but now 80, somebody figured out that feral pigs are black and have eyes that don't reflect the lights of headlights. The aftermath of a car traveling at 85 or 90 at night and hitting a 300 lb pig is not a pretty sight.

The latest project is adding a lane to the major north/south highway. That additional lane will be a toll road that will charge variable rates, the more conjestiob, the higher the toll.

[Mallette]

If some here want to talk about what ain't happening, it's getting our roadways up to minimum and the infrastructure up to code in ours or any lifetime.   We get farther behind all the time.

 

It isn't working.  Time to throw some technology at it. 

 

Dave

[Travis In Austin]

I agree, you get that technology implemented, and interconnected, it will transform ground transportation in to something way more efficient.

It will require legislation, local, regional, state and federal. That means politics, and that means special interests. Hopefully they don't mess it up too bad.

[Mallette]

Hopefully they don't mess it up too bad. [/quote

 

Yep.  It's always that "hopey/changey" thing, isn't it?

 

Dave]

[oldtimer]

LOL.  Even when people vote for it, it doesn't happen.

[Mallette]

Why pick on cars, Mark?  EVERYTHING has been moving towards New Technology=more government surveillance and control now for decades. 

 

Right down to that "smart" TV and phone...

 

Dave

[Kent T]

I have a better idea. How about making a domestic brand car, that is basic and reliable first. And can outlast the payment book and sensibly built and designed. And that folks can afford. Automatic and air, crank windows, simple to maintain. And an automatic transmission as fine as the oldies. 

[Mallette]

Not sure where you've been, Kent, but I've been keeping vehicles for a decade now for 20 years.  All used when I purchased them either for cash or a short note.  The improvement in vehicles since the 50s is amazing and while I won't claim they are cheaper, I'll say that I believe they've just kept up with inflation while costing maybe a fourth the maintenance and lasting three times as long...and I really can't even guess how much safer they are but they are a LOT safer.  The only time a car from the 50s or 60s was safe was when it was parked.  I was just talking to my 85 year old first cousin about an hour ago who's lived here all his life.  I remembered how ALL the cars over a couple of years old were rusty back in the 50s.  He was telling me how they'd put old license plates and such in the floorboard to keep from breaking through.  Now, you never see even a hint of rust on a well kept paint job even at 15 years or so. 

 

It's also my belief AVs will be OVERALL cheaper due to the fact that there will be less of them as many will elect to not own one but simply summon one when it's needed, the cost of the infrastructure will be far less, and the same with insurance.  I'll repeat:  It's ridiculous to attempt to charge a passenger in an AV for its actions.  I also believe the government will see that it makes sense to subsidize the cost of the electronics as opposed to building more roads.

 

Dave

Edited April 5, 2015 by Mallette

[Mallette]

It's trouble Dave. Clear as a bell trouble.

 

Your cell phone says more than any vehicle about you.  What about that Nest that knows when you are home and where you are in the house...and is connected to the internet?

 

AVs are no more a threat to privacy than the entirety of the Internet of Things.  Just a piece of the puzzle.  Privacy is long gone and a myth unless you find a rain forest to disappear into with no electronics at all.  Even then before long you'll hear the equipment coming to level it for more farms or toilet paper.

 

Dave

[Mallette]

I'd rather move in the other direction, Dave.

 

All ears if you have a plan.  But it isn't going to happen.  Nor can I see the NSA tracking the movements of 300 million citizens.  And you won't leave your phone at home.  Most don't even leave tracking turned off.

 

Knowing what a vehicle is doing and who is in it are two different things.  In fact, it may be they can't even know for sure if ANYONE is in it...unless they are carrying a phone.

 

I am as disgusted as you with the modern state of "privacy" but fighting it is tilting windmills.  This isn't 1925 and never will be again.  We're old farts of a dying generation.  The vast majority of people out there don't even know what a set of points is much less how to install or adjust them.  They are totally dependent on computers in their cars already.  Those logic systems will just be doing more.   While I doubt they will do it...because most don't care...I really can't see that an AV need be even identifiable via anything it needs to send to the internet, much less who is in it and such. 

 

Do you tell the TSA person "none of their business" if asked the purpose of your trip?  Or the nature of the device they are examining?  Didn't think so.  Such questions were unthinkable 40 years ago.  Normal now.

 

Dave

[Travis In Austin]

You are correct, it is not NSA that wants to track cars in US. It is DHS, and they have been doing it and they just asked for a ton more money to track vehicles and license plates.

Everywhere you go: gun store, liquor store, drug store, horse track, casino, bank, mistress, internist, urologist, etc. Whatever your issue is, whatever priority you may have, it can be intruded upon. If gun rights is your thing, they will know who own guns, ammo, shoots at firing range. Where you bank, get cash, whether you gamble, who you sleep with, when, you medical situation, where you eat, and on and on and on.

The 4th Amendment is still there, but we all talk tough about freedom and liberty, and then turn right around and get in the next line the government tells us to get into.

Edited April 6, 2015 by dwilawyer

[Travis In Austin]

Federal Legislation on autonomus vehicles:

SEC. 6052. ESTABLISHMENT AND SCOPE OF PROGRAM.

(a) Establishment.-Subject to the provisions of this part, the Secretary shall conduct a program to research, develop, and operationally test intelligent vehicle-highway systems and promote implementation of such systems as a component of the Nation's surface transportation systems.

( Goals.-The goals of the program to be carried out under this part shall include, but not be limited to-

(1) the widespread implementation of intelligent vehicle-highway systems to enhance the capacity, efficiency, and safety of the Federal-aid highway system and to serve as an alternative to additional physical capacity of the Federal-aid highway system;

(2) the enhancement, through more efficient use of the Federal-aid highway system, of the efforts of the several States to attain air quality goals established pursuant to the Clean Air Act;

(3) the enhancement of safe and efficient operation of the Nation's highway systems with a particular emphasis on aspects of systems that will increase safety and identification of aspects of the system that may degrade safety;

(4) the development and promotion of intelligent vehicle-highway systems and an intelligent vehicle-highway systems industry in the United States, using authority provided under section 307 of title 23, United States Code;

(5) the reduction of societal, economic, and environmental costs associated with traffic congestion;

(6) the enhancement of United States industrial and economic competitiveness and productivity by improving the free flow of people and commerce and by establishing a significant United States presence in an emerging field of technology;

(7) the development of a technology base for intelligent vehicle-highway systems and the establishment of the capability to perform demonstration experiments, using existing national laboratory capabilities where appropriate; and

(8) the facilitation of the transfer of transportation technology from national laboratories to the private sector.

[JJkizak]

Not sure where you've been, Kent, but I've been keeping vehicles for a decade now for 20 years.  All used when I purchased them either for cash or a short note.  The improvement in vehicles since the 50s is amazing and while I won't claim they are cheaper, I'll say that I believe they've just kept up with inflation while costing maybe a fourth the maintenance and lasting three times as long...and I really can't even guess how much safer they are but they are a LOT safer.  The only time a car from the 50s or 60s was safe was when it was parked.  I was just talking to my 85 year old first cousin about an hour ago who's lived here all his life.  I remembered how ALL the cars over a couple of years old were rusty back in the 50s.  He was telling me how they'd put old license plates and such in the floorboard to keep from breaking through.  Now, you never see even a hint of rust on a well kept paint job even at 15 years or so. 

 

It's also my belief AVs will be OVERALL cheaper due to the fact that there will be less of them as many will elect to not own one but simply summon one when it's needed, the cost of the infrastructure will be far less, and the same with insurance.  I'll repeat:  It's ridiculous to attempt to charge a passenger in an AV for its actions.  I also believe the government will see that it makes sense to subsidize the cost of the electronics as opposed to building more roads.

 

Dave

 

Your right on about the reliability. Here in the rust belt it was common to see vehicles with major rust after three years. Now it takes ten years before you see any rust at all and another five to see holes if you don't fix the rust. But they do use Chinese parts to replace things. The new hood for my 1993 Grand Cherokee was $63.00 and the new Jeep emblem was $67.50. So I got a new trailer hitch because of the recall. 

JJK

[DrWho]

Can someone explain to me how a 5 mile traffic jam suddenly becomes 1 mile ("5x more capacity") just by switching to AVs? I'm thinking specifically about Chicago traffic here and my experiences watching rush hour unfold from the view of the Sears Tower.

I think there's this incorrect mindset that people drive very inefficiently. The inefficiencies caused by the two or three people you're complaining about each day are simply insignificant. Do you not see how your emotions are tainting your perspective? Cognitive bias is a brutal thing to overcome.

There is a finite length of road, and there are a certain number of cars that will be driving on it. For a given speed and safe following distance, there is a maximum density of cars. Around Chicago, we generally drive 75mph with 1.5 car lengths between cars. To increase the capacity on those stretches by 5x, you'd need to be driving at least 150mph, and that's assuming every car is touching. This is why I don't understand the 5x claim.

Maybe you're talking about a different scenario? Maybe parking is faster, but then how much of the total commute is spent parking? 5 minutes maybe on a bad day? Going from a 30 minute total commute to 26min isn't exactly a 5x improvement in my mind. My only point is you have to look at the entire picture. Optimizing narrow scenarios doesn't represent the larger picture.

I think the only thing going for AVs is that people want to be doing something other than driving while commuting. All this talk about efficiency and whatnot is more propaganda and marketing than reality. And when it comes to fruition, other systemic factors will be blamed when the claims are not met.

[Travis In Austin]

Who,

I think the inefficiency I see on a daily basis is that people won't yield, so as they try to move over a lane, they have to slow down because no one will let them in, and it has the effect of slowing down that entire lane for some distance behind.

The same is true when entering a freeway during rush hour. There will be a long line of cars entering a highway, they will not space themselves out to makenit easier to merge. So they put up lights to control flow of on ramp that forces drivers to space themselves and I know that helps a great deal.

I do agree with your assessment that if the offramps are backed up that starts to back up the exit lane, and then the adjacent lane, because people won't anticipate and move over earlier or don't want to wait, and you have slow moving traffic.

However, you put in an HOV and/or AV lane that bypasses DT, you will move that traffic. In the Bay Area there are freeways with six lanes each direction, plus exit only lanes. Two of those lanes are HOV. One for 2 or more, and one for 3 or more. Those lanes fly, the others sit.

I think it is going to be a very long time before we have enough AVs to where traffic engineers can start to integrate it all into significant times savings.

I think it will be AV lane to make an incentive to get them and at some point there will be enough vehicles that there could begin to be a savings on infrastructure. The true savings will be when they can save by not having to expand or widening a current highway. When it get to the point that an engineer tells a city, county, or state that you can increase flow, at a fraction of the cost of building a new lane, by doing so and so with AV vehicles, designate a lane, or mandating them on that highway, or whatever it is, that is the point where there a fundamental shift to AV usage by Govt and consumers.

There is zero savings in infrastructure before then. It will be interesting to see if it moves quicker locally or federally. The test beds seem to be local, like Conta Costa County. However, some states are afraid of technology or are beholden and have done things like trying to outlaw Teslas (Michigan, New Jersey, etc.).

My opinion is that there can be a traffic flow improvement with AVs but you have to have a significant number of people using them to get to that point, and to achieve that you need to get the price way down and/or provide incentitives.

[Travis In Austin]

In terms of federal funds we are spending a vast majority of funds on maintenance and repair of existing roads than building new roads, lanes or increasing capacity.

Here are rough costs on what roads cost:

The following are some examples:

Construct a new 2-lane undivided road – about $2-$3 million per mile in rural areas, about $3-5 million in urban areas.

Construct a new 4-lane highway — $4-$6 million per mile in rural and suburban areas, $8-$10 million per mile in urban areas.

Construct a new 6-lane Interstate highway – about $7 million per mile in rural areas, $11 million or more per mile in urban areas.

Mill and resurface a 4-lane road – about $1.25 million per mile.

Expand an Interstate Highway from 4 lanes to 6 lanes – about $4 million per mile.

[Mallette]

I think the inefficiency I see on a daily basis is that people won't yield, so as they try to move over a lane, they have to slow down because no one will let them in, and it has the effect of slowing down that entire lane for some distance behind.

 

Bingo.  Human drivers could not be more inefficient.  Half think only of themselves.  Where lanes are shut down for whatever reason it is chaos as drivers never, as they should, neatly pass in order to the open lane.  My since is the completely selfish attitudes cause those delays to be twice or more what they would be if the process where under AV control.

 

So many other examples.

 

Dave

[Travis In Austin]

All this talk about efficiency and whatnot is more propaganda and marketing than reality.

I am reminded of the propaganda in California regarding diamond or HOV lanes. It was sold as a device to save fuel and reduce traffic jams. So many billions were spent on adding these lanes in the highest traffic areas. All that to watch one car per minute drive by in these lanes, while thousands of cars sit idling. American's don't carpool - period - end of discussion. Do you think after 35 years the planners would understand? Nope. Still wasting billions on this in California. If you used that lane for general throughput, traffic would be greatly reduced. Watching a few Mom's with 2 kids in the car whiz by on the way to school? Not so useful.

I certainly agree with that, you cannot get people to car pool. Well, to work anyway. Soccer moms invented car pooling, and they sure seem to know how to get the maximum advantage out of that.

I went through all of that HOV creation in California, when people were buying lifesize dolls to put in front seat, etc.

I still wouldn't change a thing on HOV except to have done it sooner so they would have voted to take BART down to Santa Clara County and connected back up at Fremont.