· Project Acronym: OPTIMUM Grant Agreement number: 636160 (H2020-MG-7.1 - RIA) Project Full...

Project Acronym: OPTIMUM

Grant Agreement number: 636160 (H2020-MG-7.1 - RIA)

Project Full Title: Multi-source Big Data Fusion Driven Proactivity for Intelligent

Mobility

DELIVERABLE

D1.2 – Requirements Specification

Dissemination level PU

Type of Document Report

Contractual date of delivery 31 January 2016 (M9)

Actual Date of Delivery 29 February 2016 (M10)

Deliverable Number D1.2

Deliverable Name Requirements Specification

Deliverable Leader TREDIT SA

Work package(s) WP1

Status & version 2.0 – Final (revised)

Number of pages 138

WP contributing to the deliverable WP1

WP / Task responsible WP1/T1.2

Coordinator (name / contact) Mr. Konstantinos Thivaios (INTRASOFT International)

Other Contributors ALL partners

EC Project Officer Mr. Georgios Sarros (EC, INEA)

Keywords: User Requirements, Questionnaire survey

Abstract (few lines): Collection of User Requirements as a basis for

defining use cases and system requirements in the

forthcoming activities within tasks 1.3 and 1.4

Project Title: OPTIMUM Contract No. 636160 Project Coordinator: INTRASOFT International S.A.

Page | 2

D1.2 – Requirements Specification,

Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Document History

Version Date Contributor(s) Description

0.2 2nd Plenary Meeting

Birmingham: 20 - 21/ 01/2016

TREDIT SA Initial ToC circulated to

consortium for comments

0.3 01/02/2016 TREDIT SA Updated ToC

0.5 22/02/2016 TREDIT SA, ALL Draft for internal and consortium

Peer Review

0.8 26/02/2016 TREDIT SA Final Editing - Update document

addressing comments received

0.9 29/02/2016 INTRA Final Approval, QA

1.0 29/02/2016 INTRA Final document for submission to

the EC

1.5 21/03/2017 TREDIT SA Revised version after reviewers’

comments

1.8 28/03/2017 TIS, TREDIT S.A. Integration of internal review

comments

2.0 10/04/2017 INTRA QA, Submission to the EC


Page | 3


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Deliverable resubmission EC Recommendation Action performed Section in the

document

Many reference errors –

references towards

figures and tables.

Errors corrected throughout the document Entire document

For Birmingham it is not

clear how many people

were involved in the

questionnaire 223 (par

24) vs 1500 (page 21)

Out of the 1800 members of the peoples’

panel, the questionnaire was sent to 1100 out

of which 223 responded, that is approx. 20%

feedback

Section 2

Methodology p.p.

23

Section 3 Analysis

of Survey Results

p.p.27

Number of

questionnaires in

Slovenia for pilot 1 is

rather limited (18)

which are even mostly

from project partners.

Pilot Case 1 has three cities for testing the

exact same services, therefore the cumulative

number of participants for Vienna, Birmingham

and Ljubljana were deemed substantial.

No major deviations have been found between

cities’ participants in the Questionnaire Survey.

•

Evaluation during the first round of the pilots

will further enhance the collected

requirements.

Ch. 3.1.3.1 (p.p.51)

Pilot case 2 only 1

motorway operator and 2

freight operators are

involved which makes it a

very limited sample which

puts a question mark on

the acceptance and

expected impact.

Portugal has designed and deployed a new concept

approach on toll charging, with IP as public

infrastructure manager (which president is

nominated directly from the government) and

highway concessionary entity (controlling 4 sub

concessionaries). Their position allows to have the

big picture of the Portuguese scenario on the entire

national road network (encompassing national and

highway roads).

Luis Simoes the freight logistic operator by its

dimension allows them to have the full

comprehension of the Portuguese scenario on the

Chapter 3.2.1

(p.p.69)

Chapter

3.2.2(p.p.70-71)


Page | 4


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

freight logistics matters.

As they operate both with sub-contracting small

logistic operators and own fleet they are in the

position to understand the sector needs and

respond for the sector desires. Therefore, they can

represent the Portuguese and Spanish logistic

market.

It is not clear how is dealt

with social required

answers, even though the

questionnaires were

unanimous people might

give answers they expect

to be the right ones.

Several measures are put into place in order to

reduce response bias

(http://www.statisticshowto.com/response-bias/)

including: a) asking neutrally worder questions; b)

anonymity c) avoiding leading questions and d)

non-specific reference to brands or practices.

(see p.p. 22-23

Chapter 2,

Methodology)

The list of user-

requirements is extremely

long. There should be

more focus on Optimum

specific requirements

which will reduce the

length of the list

All requirements presented are OPTIMUM specific -

The large number of detailed requirements is due

to multi-dimensional analysis (e.g. static/real

time/forcasted and pre-, on- post-trip etc)

Consolidation of results has been performed by

selecting 20 high-level reqs/services which were

used in the framework of Task 1.3 and 1.4

Ch. 5 Conclusions

(p.p.130)

Reference is made

to tables 25-26-27

The questionnaires are

very interesting. However,

it is a missed opportunity

not to involve the truck

drivers directly. It might be

so that they have more,

other reasons for specific

routings, e.g. favourite

restaurant, lunch with

others/colleagues etc.

Pilot action 2 and the proactive charging scheme is

focused exclusively to highway operators and

freight/logistics operators. Truck drivers are not

allowed to alter the pre-defined scheduled route of

their mission. Even in the case of an

incident/accident it is the freight operator who

decides corrective actions and new routes

Chapter 3.2.1

(p.p.69)

Chapter 3.2.2

(p.p.70-71)

Chapter 3.2.3

(p.p.72)

http://www.statisticshowto.com/response-bias/


Page | 5


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Table of Contents Deliverable resubmission ................................................................................................................ 3

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 10

1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 12

1.1 Objective of the Deliverable ......................................................................................... 14

1.2 Description of Pilot Cases ............................................................................................. 14

1.2.1 Pilot Case 1: “Proactive Improvement of Transport Systems Quality and Efficiency”

14

1.2.2 Pilot Case 2: “Proactive Charging Schemes for Freight Transport” .......................... 16

1.2.3 Pilot Case 3: “Integrated Car2x Communication Platform” ..................................... 18

1.3 Structure of the Deliverable ......................................................................................... 20

2 Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 21

3 Analysis of Survey Results ..................................................................................................... 28

3.1 Pilot Case 1: “Proactive Improvement of Transport Systems Quality and Efficiency .. 28

3.1.1 United Kingdom (Birmingham) ................................................................................. 28

3.1.2 Austria (Vienna) ........................................................................................................ 44

3.1.3 Slovenia (Ljubljana) ................................................................................................... 57

3.2 Pilot Case 2: “Proactive Charging Schemes for Freight Transport” .............................. 70

3.2.1 Freight/ Logistic Operator ......................................................................................... 71

3.2.2 Highway Operator ..................................................................................................... 72

3.2.3 Truck Drivers ............................................................................................................. 74

3.3 Pilot Case 3: “Integrated Car2x Communication Platform” ......................................... 75

3.3.1 Sampling Size ............................................................................................................ 75

3.3.2 Analysis of User Profiles ............................................................................................ 75

3.3.3 Analysis of Environmental & Safety Aspects ............................................................ 77

3.3.4 Analysis of Potential User Requirements ................................................................. 78

4 OPTIMUM Platform User Requirements ............................................................................... 90


Page | 6


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

4.1 Evaluation of Potential User Requirements ................................................................. 90

4.1.1 Pilot Case 1: “Proactive Improvement of Transport Systems Quality and Efficiency

90

4.1.2 Pilot Case 2: “Proactive Charging Schemes for Freight Transport” .......................... 98

4.1.3 Pilot Case 3: “Integrated Car2x Communication Platform” ..................................... 98

4.2 Determination of User Requirements ........................................................................ 100

4.2.1 Pilot Case 1: “Proactive Improvement of Transport Systems Quality and Efficiency

101

4.2.2 Pilot Case 2: “Proactive Charging Schemes for Freight Transport” ........................ 114

4.2.3 Pilot Case 3: “Integrated Car2x Communication Platform” ................................... 120

5 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 135

6 References ........................................................................................................................... 137

7 APPENDIX I: Pilot Case 1: Questionnaire ............................................................................. 138

8 APPENDIX II: Pilot Case 2: Questionnaire ............................................................................ 139

9 APPENDIX III: Pilot Case 3: Questionnaire ........................................................................... 140

10 APPENDIX IV: User Requirements per OPTIMUM Potential Service .............................. 141

Table of Figures FIGURE 1: OVERALL STUDY METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................... 21 FIGURE 2: IMAGE OF ON-LINE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PILOT CASE 1 ............................................................................................. 25 FIGURE 3: IMAGE OF ON-LINE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PILOT CASE 3 ............................................................................................. 26 FIGURE 4: AGE GROUP OF SAMPLE – BIRMINGHAM (U.K.) ...................................................................................................... 29 FIGURE 5: PERSONAL ACCESS TO NUMBER OF VEHICLES – BIRMINGHAM (U.K.) ............................................................................ 30 FIGURE 6: FACTORS ENCOURAGING THE USE OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT - BIRMINGHAM (U.K.) ............................................................ 32 FIGURE 7: FACTORS ENCOURAGING THE USE OF CAR-SHARING - BIRMINGHAM (U.K.) ................................................................... 33 FIGURE 8: FACTORS ENCOURAGING THE USE OF BICYCLE - BIRMINGHAM (U.K.) ........................................................................... 33 FIGURE 9: FACTORS ENCOURAGING THE USE OF WALKING - BIRMINGHAM (U.K.) ......................................................................... 34 FIGURE 10: SCORING OF THE TIS DATA CONTENT - BIRMINGHAM (U.K.) .................................................................................... 36 FIGURE 11: TYPE OF MOBILE DEVICE THAT CURRENTLY USED - BIRMINGHAM (U.K.) ...................................................................... 40 FIGURE 12: AGE GROUP OF SAMPLE – VIENNA (AUSTRIA) ....................................................................................................... 44 FIGURE 13: PERSONAL ACCESS TO NUMBER OF VEHICLES – VIENNA (AUSTRIA) ............................................................................. 45 FIGURE 14: FACTORS ENCOURAGING THE USE OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT – VIENNA (AUSTRIA) ............................................................ 47 FIGURE 15: FACTORS ENCOURAGING THE USE OF CAR-SHARING – VIENNA (AUSTRIA) .................................................................... 48 FIGURE 16: FACTORS ENCOURAGING THE USE OF BICYCLE – VIENNA (AUSTRIA) ............................................................................ 48 FIGURE 17: FACTORS ENCOURAGING THE USE OF WALKING – VIENNA (AUSTRIA) ......................................................................... 49


Page | 7


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

FIGURE 18: SCORING OF THE TIS DATA CONTENT - VIENNA (AUSTRIA) ........................................................................................ 50 FIGURE 19: TYPE OF MOBILE DEVICE THAT CURRENTLY USED - VIENNA (AUSTRIA) ......................................................................... 53 FIGURE 20: AGE GROUP OF SAMPLE – LJUBLJANA (SLOVENIA) .................................................................................................. 57 FIGURE 21: ACCESS TO PRIVATE VEHICLES – LJUBLJANA (SLOVENIA) .......................................................................................... 58 FIGURE 22: FACTORS ENCOURAGING THE USE OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT – LJUBLJANA (SLOVENIA) ...................................................... 60 FIGURE 23: FACTORS ENCOURAGING FOR THE USE OF CAR-SHARING – LJUBLJANA (SLOVENIA) ........................................................ 61 FIGURE 24: FACTORS ENCOURAGING FOR THE USE OF BICYCLE – LJUBLJANA (SLOVENIA) ................................................................ 61 FIGURE 25: FACTORS ENCOURAGING FOR THE USE OF WALKING – LJUBLJANA (SLOVENIA) .............................................................. 62 FIGURE 26: SCORING OF THE TIS DATA CONTENT - LJUBLJANA (SLOVENIA) .................................................................................. 63 FIGURE 27: TYPE OF MOBILE DEVICE THAT CURRENTLY USED - LJUBLJANA (SLOVENIA) .................................................................... 70 FIGURE 28: AGE GROUP OF SAMPLE .................................................................................................................................... 75 FIGURE 29: GENDER OF SAMPLE ......................................................................................................................................... 75 FIGURE 30: PROPORTION OF USERS TRAVELLING AS DRIVERS OR PASSENGERS .............................................................................. 76 FIGURE 31: EXISTING USE OF ITS COMMUNICATION CHANNELS ................................................................................................ 77 FIGURE 32: POTENTIAL USE OF SMART DRIVING DEVICE TO REDUCE FUEL CONSUMPTION ............................................................. 77 FIGURE 33: POTENTIAL USE OF SMART DRIVING DEVICE TO REDUCE CO2 EMISSIONS ................................................................... 78 FIGURE 34: POTENTIAL USE OF REAL-TIME DATA ON SAFETY TO ADJUST DRIVING BEHAVIOUR ....................................................... 78

List of Tables TABLE 1: WEEKLY PERCENTAGE USE OF TRANSPORTATION MODES FOR DIFFERENT TRIP PURPOSES – BIRMINGHAM (U.K.) ................ 30 TABLE 2: USE OF TIS FOR EACH TRANSPORTATION MODE – BIRMINGHAM (U.K.) ................................................................. 31 TABLE 3: RATING OF THE TIS DATA TYPES – BIRMINGHAM (U.K.) ..................................................................................... 37 TABLE 4: USE OF TIS PER TRIP STAGE - BIRMINGHAM (U.K.) ............................................................................................ 38 TABLE 5: USER PREFERENCE OF TIS COMMUNICATION CHANNELS – BIRMINGHAM (U.K.) .................................................... 41 TABLE 6: WEEKLY PERCENTAGE USE OF TRANSPORTATION MODES FOR DIFFERENT TRIP PURPOSES – VIENNA (AUSTRIA) ... 45 TABLE 7: CURRENT USE OF TIS FOR EACH TRANSPORTATION MODE – VIENNA (AUSTRIA) .................................................... 46 TABLE 8: RATING OF THE TIS DATA TYPES – VIENNA (AUSTRIA) ....................................................................................... 51 TABLE 9: USE OF TIS PER TRIP STAGE - VIENNA (AUSTRIA) .............................................................................................. 52 TABLE 10: USER PREFERENCE OF TIS COMMUNICATION CHANNELS – VIENNA (AUSTRIA) .................................................... 54 TABLE 11: WEEKLY PERCENTAGE USE OF TRANSPORTATION MODES FOR DIFFERENT TRIP PURPOSES – LJUBLJANA

(SLOVENIA) .......................................................................................................................................................... 58 TABLE 12: CURRENT USE OF TIS FOR EACH TRANSPORTATION MODE – LJUBLJANA (SLOVENIA) ....................................................... 59 TABLE 13: RATING OF THE TIS DATA TYPES - LJUBLJANA (SLOVENIA) ................................................................................ 64 TABLE 14: USE OF TIS PER TRIP STAGE - LJUBLJANA (SLOVENIA) ...................................................................................... 65 TABLE 15: USER PREFERENCE OF TIS COMMUNICATION CHANNELS - LJUBLJANA (SLOVENIA) ............................................... 67 TABLE 16: EXISTING USE OF ITS SERVICES PER TRIP STAGE ....................................................................................................... 76 TABLE 17: RATING OF USEFULNESS REGARDING SUSTAINABILITY CONTENT TYPE FOR FUEL CONSUMPTION & CO2 EMISSIONS CONTROL 80 TABLE 18: RATING OF USEFULNESS REGARDING SAFETY & SECURITY CONTENT TYPE FOR FUEL CONSUMPTION & CO2 EMISSIONS

CONTROL .............................................................................................................................................................. 81 TABLE 19: RATING OF DATA CONTENT USEFULNESS PER TRIP STAGE .......................................................................................... 83 TABLE 20: RATING OF DATA CONTENT IN TERMS OF “DATA ORIGIN” ......................................................................................... 84 TABLE 21: POTENTIAL USE OF ITS COMMUNICATION CHANNELS FOR SUSTAINABILITY PURPOSES ..................................................... 86 TABLE 22: POTENTIAL USE OF ITS COMMUNICATION CHANNELS FOR SAFETY & SECURITY PURPOSES ................................................ 87


Page | 8


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

TABLE 23: PERCEIVED FACTORS DETERMINING THE USE OF ITS ................................................................................................. 88 TABLE 24: EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR DETERMINATION OF USER REQUIREMENTS – PILOT CASE 1 ................................................... 90 TABLE 25: EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL USER REQUIREMENTS – PILOT CASE 1 - BIRMINGHAM, U.K................................................. 92 TABLE 26: EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL USER REQUIREMENTS – PILOT CASE 1 - VIENNA, AUSTRIA ................................................... 93 TABLE 27: EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL USER REQUIREMENTS – PILOT CASE 1 - SLOVENIA, LJUBLJANA ............................................. 94 TABLE 28: USER’ PERCEPTION FOR FACTORS PROMOTING MODAL-SHIFT PER PILOT AREA .............................................................. 96 TABLE 29: EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR DETERMINATION OF USER REQUIREMENTS – PILOT CASE 3 ................................................... 98 TABLE 30: EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL USER REQUIREMENTS – PILOT CASE 3 - LJUBLJANA, SLOVENIA ............................................. 99 TABLE 31: OPTIMUM PLATFORM USER REQUIREMENTS – PILOT CASE 1 ................................................................................ 101 TABLE 32: OPTIMUM PLATFORM USER REQUIREMENTS – PILOT CASE 2 ................................................................................ 115 TABLE 33: OPTIMUM PLATFORM USER REQUIREMENTS – PILOT CASE 3 ................................................................................ 120


Page | 9


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Definitions, Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym Title

CO Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including Commission Services)

D Demonstrator

DM Dissemination Manager

DMS Document Management System

DoA Description of Action

Dx Deliverable (where x defines the deliverable identification number e.g. D1.1.1)

EIM Exploitation Innovation Manager

EU European Union

FM Financial Manager

ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems

MSx project Milestone (where x defines a project milestone e.g. MS3)

Mx Month (where x defines a project month e.g. M10)

O Other

P Prototype

PC Project Coordinator

PM partner Project Manager

PO Project Officer

POIs Points of Interest

PP Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission Services)

PU Public

QA Quality Assurance

QAP Quality Assurance Plan

QFD Quality Function Deployment

QM Quality Manager

R Report

RE Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including Commission Services)

RUP Rational Unified Process

STEP Standard Technology Evaluation Process

STM Scientific and Technical Manager

TIS Travellers Information Services

TL Task Leader

UK United Kingdom

UR User Requirements

WP Work Package


Page | 10


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Executive Summary The objective of D1.2 “Requirements Specification” is to determine the user requirements of

the OPTIMUM pilot cases. The scope is to take into account the end-user requirements during

the design of OPTIMUM system architecture. The user requirements specified are diverse

according to the objective of each OPTIMUM pilot case, namely as (a) Pilot Case 1: “Proactive

Improvement of Transport Systems Quality and Efficiency”, (b) Pilot Case 2: “Proactive Charging

Schemes for Freight Transport”, (c) Pilot Case 3: “Integrated Car2x Communication Platform”.

Pilot Case 1 will be conducted in three (3) European cities: Birmingham (United Kingdom),

Vienna (Austria) and Ljubljana (Slovenia); Pilot Case 2 will be conducted in Lisbon (Portugal) and

Pilot Case 3 in Ljubljana (Slovenia).

Pilot Case 1 end-users are all type of travellers, Pilot Case 2 users are freight and motorway

operators, while Pilot Case 3 end-users are the campers. To specify the diverse user

requirements, different questionnaires were developed per pilot case in order to address the

distinctiveness of each pilot case. The methodology adopted for this study includes the

following steps:

o Identification of users.

o Initial definition of potential user requirements based on specific scope of each pilot

case.

o Preparation of the questionnaires.

o Revision of questionnaires in collaboration with Pilot Case leaders.

o Organization of the surveys by the Pilot Case leaders.

o Dissemination of questionnaires to end-users; per pilot case; per pilot site; per

stakeholder type.

o Analysis of survey results per pilot case and per pilot site.

o Matching results with potential user requirements per pilot case and per pilot site.

o Evaluation of potential user requirements.

o Determination of user requirements.

For Pilot Case 1, the main user requirements commonly identified are:

o with regards to data content, the dissemination of travel times per transport mode, the

real-time data for public transport arrivals at stops/ stations and the multi-modal

navigation service minimizing overall transport time is considered very important.

o The need of travel data for long-term (more than 1 hour) and short-term (less than

1hour) planning of trips. On-trip traveler information is also seen essential by the users


Page | 11


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

for the provision of travel times per transport mode, traffic incidents, scheduled traffic

events and parking guidance information regarding parking space availability.

o with regards to communication channels, web-site and mobile applications are

evaluated very high for the majority of various traveling data content. Electronic

displays at public transport stops/ stations which provide on real-time the expected

time of public transport arrivals are also considered essential. Besides, radio services are

considered quite significant for the diffusion of traffic incidents and events.

For Pilot Case 2, the acquisition by the roadside equipment of real-time traffic data information,

as well as, the integration of freight operators system with the Traffic Management Control

System to inform motorway operators promptly about the schedule trip seems to be a

significant requirement. Moreover, the determination of the algorithm with the various traffic

variables plays a significant role into the determination of dynamic toll charging which is

expected to be provided by the system. A major challenge is the adoption of this innovative

charging mechanism in practice with the existing electronic fee collection system which is

currently in operation in Portugal.

For Pilot Case 3, the main user requirements focus primarily on controlling the fuel

consumption and secondly on controlling the reduction of CO2 emissions. The services should

be primarily serving on-trip travelers’ support; the data origin is required to be real-time. Short-

term forecasts are also considered essential by campers. The main travelers’ communication

channels are considered the Smart on board units and the mobile applications. In respect to

data content, shortest travel time, the traffic conditions and traffic incidents information seem

to be major requirements. In respect to travelers’ safety and security, the data content of high

interest is the sudden change on average speed, the traffic conditions and the traffic incidents.


Page | 12


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

1 Introduction The transportation sector is undergoing a considerable transformation as it enters a new

landscape where connectivity is seamless and mobility options as well as related business

models are increasing. Besides technological advancements, which have revolutionized

transportation supply with services such as, real-time traveller information, collective travelling,

provision of way findings and navigation services regarding multi-modality of trips, the need for

more efficient transportation systems emerges due to the current vast development in

urbanization. Indeed, the number of people living in big cities is constantly increasing - by 2030

it is estimated that 60% of the global population will live in urban areas1.

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) are the means to mitigate problems emerging from the

large and even-increasing urbanization including excessive CO2 emissions, high levels of

congestion, increased accident risks and reduced quality of life. The emerging area of ‘digital-

age transportation systems’ aims at tackling the needs of different individuals while building on

massively networked systems and applying user centered approaches masking the underlying

complexity. In addition, the technological developments that underpin the operation of current

transportation services, leads to the generation of huge amount of available data with short

update rates. This growth in data production is being driven by individuals and their increased

use of media, novel types of in-vehicle and infrastructure sensors with enhanced

communication capabilities, application of modern information and communication

technologies with the proliferation of internet connected devices and systems. Data sets grow

in size because they are being gathered increasingly by ubiquitous information sensing mobile

devices, aerial sensory technologies (remote sensing), software logs, cameras, microphones,

radio-frequency identification readers, and wireless sensor networks, together with machine-

generated and unstructured data (e.g. photos, videos, social media feeds). This means that ITS

applications have to sense huge amounts of data, process them, infer and communicate usable

information in such way to allow efficient decisions and actions to be made. But for true and

real change in our life, novel transport systems have to be able to foresee situations in near real

time, and provide the means for proactive decisions which in turn will deter problems before

they even emerge. Our vision is to provide the required interoperability, adaptability and

dynamicity in systems and services for a proactive and problem-free transportation system.

OPTIMUM operates in an environment of ubiquitous connectivity throughout the

transportation systems and its surroundings that continuously provides data on the present

state and emerging situations. Examples include traffic and in-vehicle sensors, positioning

information (e.g. Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) data), occupancy of public

1 UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs/Population Division, “World Urbanization Prospects”, 2012.


Page | 13


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

transportation, crowd data sourcing through social networks and availability of modalities such

as shared bicycles and cars. Sensors for vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure

information exchange offer context-aware pervasive configurations that can infer situations on

transport networks. Environmental and weather sensors may provide insights on the status of

the ambient environment and its impact on the utilization of the transport networks. Another

important source of information refers to social sensors, i.e. citizens interacting in social media

(e.g. twitter and Facebook) openly offering opinions and observations. On the other hand, user

centered transportation information needs to be able to accommodate the individual. It needs

to provide choices for the user in a personalized and understandable manner.

OPTIMUM aims to establish a largely scalable, distributed architecture for the management and

processing of multisource big-data, enabling continuous monitoring of the transportation

systems needs and providing data-driven mobility services based on proactive decisions and

actions in an (semi-) automatic way. In order to achieve OPTIMUM’s aim, we follow a cognitive

approach based on the Observe, Orient, Decide and Act (OODA) loop of situational awareness2

that has been recognized as one of the main models for the big data supply chain - the key for

continuous situational awareness. This model recognizes decision-making occurring in a

recurring cycle of unfolding interactions with the environment, guided by cues inherent in

tradition, experience and analysis. These cues inform hypotheses about the current and

emerging situation that, in turn, drive actions which test hypotheses. Based on the OODA

approach, the project’s goal will be accomplished through the following set of scientific and

technical objectives:

1. To capitalize on the benefits and potentials of big data fusion and proactive behavior in

the diverse and multi-modal transportation context by designing a distributed and

scalable architecture

2. To enable comprehensive observations of the transport ecosystem, by designing and

developing a smart sensing system able to cope with a huge amount of heterogeneous

data in real-time (Observe)

3. To enable semantic understanding of acquired data and predict the status of transport

networks for short and medium term horizons by designing and developing an efficient

management framework for dynamic (proactive) and context-aware forecasting and

detection of the situations of interest on the basis of complex and predictive data

analysis algorithms and event-detection (Orient)

4. To realize sustainable transportation behaviors through system aware optimization

mechanisms that integrate adaptive charging and crediting models and real time

multimodal routing and navigation algorithms (Decide)

2 Dumbill, Edd. Planning for big data. O'Reilly Media, Inc., 2012.


Page | 14


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

5. To support proactive decisions and sustainable transportation behaviors through

proactive information provisioning and personalization, persuasive mechanisms (Act)

1.1 Objective of the Deliverable The objective of D1.2 “Requirements Specification” is the determination of user requirements

for the deployment of systems developed in OPTIMUM. The project consortium considers

important to take into account during the design of system architecture the end-user

requirements, since they are expected to be the main beneficiaries. The OPTIMUM platform

contains the development of three (3) pilot cases, so it is essential to examine the end-user

requirements per pilot case. OPTIMUM platform consists of 3 pilot cases, as follows:

o Pilot Case 1: “Proactive Improvement of Transport Systems Quality and Efficiency”

o Pilot Case 2: “Proactive Charging Schemes for Freight Transport”

o Pilot Case 3: “Integrated Car2x Communication Platform”

Pilot Case 1 will be conducted in three (3) European cities: Birmingham (United Kingdom),

Vienna (Austria) and Ljubljana (Slovenia); Pilot Case 2 will be conducted in Lisbon (Portugal) and

Pilot Case 3 in Ljubljana (Slovenia). Pilot Case 1 end-users are all type of travellers, Pilot Case 2

users are freight and motorway operators, while Pilot Case 3 end-users are the campers.

To specify the diverse user requirements, different questionnaires were developed per pilot

case in order to address the distinctiveness of each pilot case. Therefore, based on detailed

analysis of results, diverse user requirements are obtained per pilot case. The user

requirements per pilot case are classified to potential OPTIMUM services and domain

categories based on the initial framework of OPTIMUM concept.

1.2 Description of Pilot Cases

Three (3) Pilot Cases are developed at the framework of OPTIMUM Project. A brief description

per pilot case is presented on the following paragraphs.

1.2.1 Pilot Case 1: “Proactive Improvement of Transport Systems Quality and

Efficiency”

The OPTIMUM platform instantiation for pilot case 1 will be deployed in three major EU cities,

each one with different characteristics in terms of data sources and transportation system

particularities with main aim to improve the quality and efficiency of multi-modal trips and the

ITS as a whole by supporting proactive decisions driven by transportation network and crowd

sourcing information data.

The three urban pilot cases target proactively supporting decisions for efficient cooperation of

transportation means. This will be achieved by implementing a smart multi- modal transit


Page | 15


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

concept, which will lead to improved quality, accessibility and utilization of interconnected

transport systems. Thus a complex model of the current traffic state and short term prediction

of this state will be realized on top of advanced real-time predictive analytics and a multitude of

transport information.

From a system-wide viewpoint it is clear that the capacities of the transportation network are

not optimally used if all travellers between the same pair of origin and destination choose the

same route. System-optimal routing therefore aims to balance the traffic flow volumes in the

network to reach a system-wide equilibrium. Since changes in the traffic state and relevant

incidents (such as accidents) can occur unexpectedly at any time, it is necessary to proactively

inform traveling users and suggest alternative routes. The integration of various real-time

traffic data sources will provide the required information to realize traffic-state aware routing

and guiding the traveller along their routes to their destinations.

Despite the differences in technological and social aspects the user services that the platform

will provide in all three cities are common. These are:

o Personalised trip and routing information, based on individual preferences and current

physical and emotional states derived by observation services. The latter will be realized

by the integration of social networking tools, natural language processing and sentiment

analysis algorithms.

o Proactive services for personalized trip and re-routing based on their personal plans,

traffic information and historical data. In addition, users will be proactively informed

about incidents in the transportation network and provided with alternative route

suggestions.

o Trip optimization for all travellers taking into account the interaction between travellers

in a transportation system with limited capacities. Further main reasons for using a c-tag

are: fall Back Device (for e.g. system brake down of any system of any involved telco

provider); granting EETS compliance; acting as Multi-purpose device (parking, emission

sticker, etc.); stand alone, stationary assisting device; technology cross link; very

important: to generate enormous savings for national economies by substituting the

various stickers in the windshield with a device, which can be used for years. In addition

to that all distribution-, production- and waste management costs regarding

conventional stickers can be reduced to nearly zero.

o Cars will be equipped with c-Tags to close the value chain for the customer and

generate national economical savings as well as reducing CO2 foot print dramatically.

o Alternative services that may compensate for, or minimize, the need to travel will be

provided as part of the pilot. For example, a medium-distance business trip may be

deferred, or shorten if teleconference facilities are available at, or close to the origin.


Page | 16


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

o Introduction of incentives for travellers that favor collective and sustainable means of

transport will be trailed as part of the pilot. Such incentives can be of monetary, credit,

or privileged service provision nature and will be determined based on socio-

econometric models that will be developed as part of the project. For example,

travellers that historically use private cars every day may be offered a guaranteed

parking space if they decide to use a bus for a number of their trips.

o Persuasive and proactive recommendations for collective trips will be evaluated. Certain

trip types offer flexibility in terms of the destination concerned and the OPTIMUM

platform will capitalize on such cases in order to relieve congested areas. For example, if

a group of friends from disperse origins decide to go for shopping to an area which is

heavily congested, the OPTIMUM platform will proactively suggest alternatives.

The OPTIMUM pilot case 1 will be evaluated using a two-stage approach. In doing so, 40 users

will be invited to participate in the first stage, during which a very intense and detailed

evaluation procedure will comprise participation in focus groups, extensive qualitative one-on-

one interviews, conduction of specified test scenarios with the prototypes and keeping of a

detailed trip diary.

The second stage will involve a broader evaluation with a much bigger user base, but with

lower intensity regarding the individual participants’ need for participation. Participants for the

second stage will be recruited through online raffle for vouchers, or through established user

bases accessible by the project’s partners. Through these measures it is expected (based on

experience from similar trials) that around 300 to 500 users can be motivated to test the

system. In order to fully understand and evaluate the benefits of the proposed platform, users

with different travel habits will be invited to participate. The behavior, towards the platform, of

each group of users will be analyzed based on a number of variables such as; willingness to use

public transport, dependence on private vehicles, environmental awareness, privacy and

security sensitivity, time dependence, willingness to pay, planning and schedule flexibility and

others. In order to quantify the impact of the pilot different key performance indicators (from

the list presented above) will be evaluated for each group of travelers. Feedback will be

collected by online and in-app questionnaires, and the data and interface events during the trial

phase will be logged and then analyzed. The results observed from the pilot participants will

then be extrapolated in order to predict the impact of a wider adoption of the platform.

1.2.2 Pilot Case 2: “Proactive Charging Schemes for Freight Transport”

The Pilot Case 2 relates to dynamic charging for road use by freight vehicles based on real-time

conditions of the transport network by the use of parameters, such as level of service provided

in the roads; road safety; comfort in trips; environmental data (CO2 Emissions & Noise); and

economic values (cost maintenance & toll revenues).


Page | 17


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Urban and national road networks in many countries are severely congested, resulting in

increased travel times, increased number of stops, unexpected delays, greater travel costs,

inconvenience to drivers and passengers, increased air pollution and noise level, and increased

number of traffic accidents. Expanding traffic network capacities by building more roads is

extremely costly as well as environmentally damaging. More efficient usage of the existing

network is vital in order to improve the logistic operators’ service, reduce operational delays,

reduce the traffic accidents rate and increase the revenue of the road operators. Portugal has a

good and underused tolled highway network that is close to congested free urban/national

road network. Usually logistic operators choose to use free roads disregarding safety, travel

time and other aspects, basing their decision much relied on toll prices. Therefore, the

urban/national road network has been suffering from a more intensive use than it was

projected for, increasing maintenance costs and reducing safety and comfort for users. The

main motivation of this pilot is to shift traffic from urban / national roads to Highways. To this

end, a model will be developed in order to calculate dynamic toll pricing. Dynamic pricing can

reduce congestion by moving some traffic demand to alternate times, routes, modes, or by

eliminating trips. Previous studies have shown that when transportation agencies implement

variable pricing, truck drivers significantly shift their travel patterns around the pricing

structures. Drivers reduce their traveling from the peak periods to the discounted, off-peak

periods. The adoption of new, variably-priced lanes allows traffic to flow with higher standards

of safety and quality, reduces congestion at the urban /national road network, decreases the

maintenance costs of those roads that were not designed to accommodate the verified demand

of heavy vehicles, and increases vehicle throughput on the overall facility.

A model will be developed, additionally to improved financial ratios in infrastructures

management, allowing increased quality of life for users and population living near the

urban/national roads. The model is expected to remove traffic from national and regional roads

whenever information on the defined indicators is higher than the limits imposed by applicable

legislation.

Transport Logistics companies are considered the main users of the road network, which

repeatedly request flexibility in toll pricing. Moreover, these users are the ones to be deemed

responsible in terms of their impact to the environment as well as for raising road maintenance

costs. The fact that OPTIMUM is engaging the logistics operators provides the reliance that the

model will be used in large scale and reflects the needs expressed by the operator. Real time

information and suggested alternative routes whenever non foreseen situations appear. To use

and verify the efficiency of the dynamic pricing a partner from the consortium (L.S.) in his

capacity as a logistic operator will test the OPTIMUM project application. In fact it is envisaged

that L.S. will include 10 trucks from their fleet in order to test this dynamic pricing solution.


Page | 18


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

The following services are foreseen to be provided within Pilot Case 2:

o OPTIMUM’s dynamic charging model will combine historical and real-time data

collected, in order to calculate highways tolls pricing with x hours advance time. This

way, the logistics companies could plan their routes according the variation of the tolls.

o Establishment of a table of tolls pricing for periods of the day and the week, and

measure the different impacts of traffic, accidents, revenues, maintenance costs,

emission CO2 and noise levels, in the highways versus national roads.

1.2.3 Pilot Case 3: “Integrated Car2x Communication Platform” Pilot Case 3 intends to provide to cognitive campers personalized services affecting their travel.

This includes monitoring, safety, planning, alerting, leisure environment in the car. Mobility

professionals (who also have important mobility needs like taxi drivers, truck drivers, couriers,

etc.) will be able to be informed in real-time for any possible anomalies and possible risks

corresponding to the route they are following. Cognitive camper manufacturer will develop

further advanced services to support their customers in safer, more reliable and interesting

routes. Existing mobility service and technology providers will have an enlarged customer base

and new opportunities for provision of their services to mobility actors.

The system rational is to provide an intelligent assistance for dealing with complexities of multi-

sensor environments for long distance and cross-border trips. As part of the use case camper-

vans and trailers will be used, however analysis of the transferability of the outcomes in other

modes (i.e. freight transport) will be performed as part of the pilot. The specific mode was

chosen since such vehicles are bigger and consequently slower vehicles, which especially during

holidays, contribute to the congestions on the highways, other roads and parking places. In

addition, camper-vans and trailers are suitable for cross-border studies due to the long-range

nature of the trips they perform. This type of vehicles resemble cars, or any other vehicle, but

with bigger influence factor (similarly to trucks). Besides the standard driving context, a

camper-van has bigger complexity because of various road limits, parking place and camp

limits. They search for/need additional infrastructure on gas stations (waste disposal,

electricity, availability of gas), bicycle availability in the cities for local transport, etc. while they

are subject to problems of safety. Furthermore, users of these vehicles already tend to connect

to sorts of informal networks. From the service consumer point of view, the camper vans and

trailers are ideal to show the benefits of having various data sources and a complex mobility

system.

A fleet consisting of at least 18 campers with full sensor setups (60 sensors and actuators) are

expected to be used as a data feed for decision-making).

The following services are foreseen to be provided within Pilot Case 3:


Page | 19


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

o Intelligent assistance for dealing with complexities of multi-sensor environments for

long distance and cross border trips.

o Provision of cognitive behavior of the vehicle towards the traveller, including vehicle

self-aware subsystems control, monitoring and prediction, intelligent and personalized

route planning, managing, monitoring and proactive re-planning that is based on the

traveller intentions, traveller leisure behavior modes, tourist route spots, current traffic

and camping places states, car to car interaction joining tourist travellers in a fleet to get

self-organized for the cases of collective camping security, joint rides, and car to the

operating centre connection and monitoring.

o Implementation of effective incentive mechanisms for users to provide system data

from the devices and sensors. Both partners LPP and AdriaMobil have already

implemented this mechanism that is being largely used by their users. AdriaMobil has

embedded mechanisms in the cognitive vehicle where users are communicating with

the vehicle providing not only data but knowledge that is being inserted properly in the

common sense knowledge base.

o Integration of contactless smart card for cashless payments that can be also used to pay

for other public services like parking, access to museums, cultural and sports objects,

etc.

o Crowd sourcing services that will collect information about the status of everything that

might influence the city infrastructure.

o The cognitive behavior developed and tested in leisure vehicles will be integrated and

tested in other vehicles in the public transport including, buses, taxis, cars and bicycles.

A series of deep analytics and modelling services will enable the operator to develop

short term plans but also long term strategies and additional incentive models.

o ADRIA will deploy their control and support center allowing ADRIA to offer to their

customer’s additional services for online vehicle monitoring, maintenance and support,

trip planning and advisor, security and traveller’s safety services and optimal route

planning that will be based on various criteria functions devised from the personalized

traveller model.


Page | 20


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

1.3 Structure of the Deliverable The present report contains the following Chapters:

o Chapter 1, an introduction chapter including also a brief description of each pilot case

implemented in OPTIMUM project.

o In Chapter 2, the methodological study approach is briefly described.

o In Chapter 3, the detailed analysis of survey results is presented per pilot case and pilot

area.

o In Chapter 4, the user requirements are presented per pilot case and pilot area based on

the analysis of the survey results.

o In Chapter 5, the main conclusions are drawn.

o In Chapter 6, the references contributed to the study execution are presented.

This Report contains four (4) Appendices. In Appendix I to III, the questionnaires for the three

(3) pilot cases are presented, while in Appendix IV the user requirements per potential

OPTIMUM service are presented for the three (3) pilot cases.

In order to achieve the deliverable goals, the following methodology was defined and applied

for each research area:

o Preparation of on-line and hard copies questionnaires was developed in order to

identify user needs and requirements.

o Similar questionnaires were studied in order to take into account useful aspects during

the analysis.

o Questionnaires were distributed to specific target groups per pilot case and pilot area.

o Questionnaire results were analyzed per pilot case and per pilot area.

o User requirements were formulated based on the analysis of results per pilot case and

pilot area.

More details in the section that follows.


Page | 21


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

2 Methodology The overall methodology adopted for the determination of user requirements is strongly

related to the detailed examination of end-users requirements. The overall methodology was

adopted for the three (3) pilot cases which will be conducted within OPTIMUM project. The

main methodological steps are illustrated in the figure below:

Users Identification

Initial Definition of User Requirements

Revision of Questionnaires with Pilot Case Leaders

Preparation & Execution of Surveys

Analysis of Surveys Results

Evaluation of Potential User Requirements

Preparation of Questionnaires

Determination of User Requirements

Step 1

Step 2

Step 3

Step 4

Step 5

Step 6

Step 7

Step 8

Figure 1: Overall Study Methodology

The methodological approach is briefly analysed below:


Page | 22


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

1. Identification of users. A consultation was undertaken among the multi-disciplinary

OPTIMUM project team in order to define the participants on the determination of the

survey. It was decided to specify user requirements based the pilot cases end-users,

since they are expected to be the final beneficiaries from the system implementation;

since the implementation of each pilot case aims to different target groups,

diversification on participants is required. The diverse-end users were recognized based

on the objectives of each pilot case and on the relevant implementation site. Therefore,

the participants for the specification of user requirements are (a) all type of travellers

for the site of Pilot Case 1 (in Birmingham, Vienna and Ljubljana), (b) freight operators

and highway operators for the site of Pilot Case (Portugal), and (c) campers for the site

of Pilot Case 3 (Ljubljana). In order to obtain the participants opinion, surveys were

decided to be conducted.

2. Initial definition of user requirements. Per pilot case and based on the scope and the

objective of each case, potential user requirements were initially defined. The scope of

this task was to examine which aspects would be meaningful to be taken into account

from the end-users during the development of OPTIMUM architecture for the pilot

cases. Diverse potential needs were identified for each pilot case.

3. Preparation of questionnaires. Four (4) different types of questionnaire were

developed in order to address the diverse potential user requirements of the system

end-users. For each pilot case, a different questionnaire was prepared. For Pilot Case 2

where there are two (2) types of stakeholders/ users, freight and motorway operator,

different questionnaires were developed in order to address their diverse requirements.

In the design of questionnaire, it was foreseen the questionnaire format to match the

potential user requirements. For each type of questionnaire, at each relevant question

field, a unique ID was defined in order to match the users’ answers with the potential

user requirements.

4. Revision of questionnaires in collaboration with Pilot Case leaders. In case by case, a

throughout consultation was made among the OPTIMUM project team and the Pilot

Case leaders in order to revise the questionnaires and to ensure that meet the

objectives of each OPTIMUM pilot case. Moreover, Pilot Case leaders ensure that the

end-users will be able to clearly understand the questionnaires in order to obtain

meaningful findings. Worth mentioning that the survey methodology as a scientific field

seeks to identify principles about the sample design, data collection instruments,

statistical adjustment of data, data processing and final data analysis that may create

systematic and random survey errors. Several measures were put into place in order to


Page | 23


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

reduce response bias (http://www.statisticshowto.com/response-bias/) including:

a)asking neutrally worder questions; b) anonymity; c) non-leading questions and d) non-

specific reference to brands or practices (See Shaughnessy, J.; Zechmeister, E.; Jeanne,

Z. (2011). Research methods in psychology (9th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill. pp.

161–175. Reference is also made to OPTIMUM deliverables D3.2 and D4.3 where

appropriate descriptions about the surveys, samples and methodology can be found.

5. Preparation and execution of surveys. The Pilot Case leaders identified the target

groups which will participate in the actual implementation of the survey. Per

implementation site the following actions were taken:

o Birmingham (United Kingdom). The target group used as part of the elicitation of the user requirements for Birmingham’s instantiation of pilot case 1, originated from Birmingham’s People’s Panel3. The people's panel is a cross section of Birmingham residents who are aged over 16, that is refreshed with new volunteers

periodically and broadly fits the city's demographic profile. As part of the process of joining the panel, participants complete a baseline questionnaire that is used for the formulation of a user profile, with information related to service use and involvement, household and demographic data and use of technology. In order to broaden the user base for Birmingham’s pilot the questionnaire was also distributed to the employees of Birmingham City Council (BCC). The council currently employees more than 10,000 staff with various roles and responsibility. Participants were requested to complete the questionnaire as transport users within the West Midlands conurbation. The ITS questionnaire link was sent to a total of 1,100 panel members who had provided either an email addresses or a mobile phone number in, therefore the response rate finaly achieved was approx. 20% .

3

The Panel was first set up in 1999 as a way of involving the citizens of Birmingham in the development of Council priorities and policies. It is a

sounding board for the Council, whilst giving citizens across the city an opportunity to speak out and provide valuable feedback. The Panel now consists of 1,800 members, who broadly represent the demographics of the adult population of Birmingham, and can be invited to complete questionnaires, take part in telephone interviews, focus groups (both face-to-face and online) and workshops. Panel members can be engaged through various channels, including email, post, mobile text messages, and telephone. The Panel is currently independently managed and maintained by BMG, with direction from the Strategic Research Team, for a cost. There is a periodic update and refresh of the panel to maintain the numbers and representation. The last refresh was in 2014, using the Postcode Address File (PAF) alongside Mosaic and OAC Classifications to target under-represented citizens by postcode, for example postcodes characterised by low affluence and by high BME populations.

http://www.statisticshowto.com/response-bias/


Page | 24


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

o Vienna (Austria). The target group for collection of user needs have been both

personnel of the involved partners as well as through a pool of individuals that

have already participated in similar studies. AIT assisted in collecting feedback

from personnel as Vienna transport users and has also conducted individuals so

that different types of users are providing their feedback.

o Ljubljana (Slovenia). In the case of Slovenia two different pilot services are going

to be conducted: the traveller information service TIS in Ljubljana as well as the

Adria pilot regarding the Car2X service. With regards to TIS, LPP partner has

motivated users both inside the organization as well as individuals. With regards

to Car2X pilot, Adria partner has reached to their camper drivers/users and

provided them with hard copies of the relevant questionnaires.

o Portugal. With regards to the Dynamic Charging pilot in Portugal, two different

questionnaires were produced: one for the Infrastructure provider and another

focusing on the Logistics Service Providers or fleet providers. Finally OPTIMUM

partner Estradas de Portugal provided the relevant response as an Infrastructure

provider (as the main user/implementer of the service) while two different fleet

operators provided their feedback regarding the views of the LSP stakeholder:

Luis Simoes Logistica as OPTIMUM partner who also involved a Logistics operator

Pereira & Pestana Transportes from Portugal. In that way the responses were

enhanced with the views of stakeholders outside the OPTIMUM consortium

presenting in that way also complete needs and views of the market.

For Pilot Case 1, the dissemination of the survey was undertaken via the completion of

on-line questionnaire by the end-users of Birmingham, Vienna and Ljubljana (figure 2).

The hard copy edition is also presented in Appendix I.


Page | 25


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Figure 2: Image of On-Line Questionnaire for Pilot Case 1

For Pilot Case 2, hard copy questionnaires were distributed to the end-users. The two

(2) types of questionnaires for motorway operator and logistic service providers are

presented in Appendix II.

For Pilot Case 3, the dissemination of the survey was undertaken via the completion of

on-line questionnaire by the end-users of Ljubljana (figure 3). The hard copy edition is

also presented in Appendix III.


Page | 26


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Figure 3: Image of On-Line Questionnaire for Pilot Case 3

6. Analysis of surveys results. The responses of each questionnaire were stored in a

database. For Pilot Case 1, separate detailed analysis of survey results was undertaken

per site. For Pilot Case 2, since the nature of the survey and the sample was low, a

qualitative analysis of results was conducted. For Pilot Case 3, detailed analysis of

results was undertaken.

7. Evaluation of potential user requirements. As previously mentioned, the questionnaire

was designed so that the survey results will match the potential user requirements. A

unique ID was created for each questionnaire field in order to correspond with a

relevant potential user requirement. The next step was to evaluate the potential user

requirements based on the analysis of questionnaire results. A rating scale was adopted

for the evaluation of each potential user requirement “Low”, “Medium”, and “High”.

This rating scale was determined according to criteria set for each question based on

detailed analysis of results (applicable to Pilot Cases 1 and 3). Identical rating scale was

adopted for Pilot Case 2; the evaluation of the potential user requirements was based

on the OPTIMUM project team perception of the qualitative analysis of results.

Determination of user requirements. The determination of user requirements that will be

taken into account during the design process of OPTIMUM platform was based on the

evaluation of the potential user requirements. It was decided that potential user requirements

scoring “High” or “Medium” will compose the user requirements. Three (3) tables are


Page | 27


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

developed with the user requirements per pilot case; the user requirements are classified into

potential OPTIMUM service and relevant OPTIMUM domain category. The potential OPTIMUM

services are: (a) navigation, (b) tracking, (c) (re-) routing, (d) proactive information and (e)

charging and crediting. The OPTIMUM domain categories are (a) usability, (b) safety and

security, (c) legal policy, (d) sustainability and (e) economic. It is possible that a user

requirement will lie within more than OPTIMUM service or/ and more than one OPTIMUM

domain category. Moreover, for each user requirement the priority level and the user profile is

described.


Page | 28


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

3 Analysis of Survey Results This Chapter includes an analysis of results obtained by the execution of the surveys for the

three (3) pilot cases. More specifically:

o Pilot Case 1 entitled “Proactive Improvement of Transport System Quality and

Efficiency. A detailed analysis is undertaken for each pilot site in Birmingham (U.K.),

Vienna (Austria) and Ljubljana (Slovenia).

o Pilot Case 2 entitled “Proactive Charging Schemes for Freight Transport”. A qualitative

analysis of stakeholders responds, logistic service providers and motorway operator in

Portugal, is included.

o Pilot Case 3 entitled “Integrated Car2x Communication Platform”. A detailed analysis is

undertaken for the pilot site in Ljubljana (Slovenia).

3.1 Pilot Case 1: “Proactive Improvement of Transport Systems Quality

and Efficiency

In the following paragraphs the analysis of results for each pilot site is described.

3.1.1 United Kingdom (Birmingham)

3.1.1.1 Sampling Size

At the time of the ITS questionnaire being sent out, the structure of 1,800 strong People’s Panel was:

Female / Male 54%/46%

Age 16-24 – 13% Age 25-44 – 36% Age 45-64 – 29% Age 65+ - 22%

White British – 65% White Irish / White other – 4% BME – 31%

Employed and full time students – 54% Unemployed 10% Retired 23% Other 14%


Page | 29


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

The total number of users who participated in the questionnaire survey for OPTIMUM -

Birmingham Pilot case 1 was 223. The majority of respondents (84%) belong to the age groups

from 46 to 65 years. In detail, the distribution of respondents by age group shown in figure

below.

0,0%0,9%

4,1%

15,5%

24,1%

27,7% 27,7%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

16-18 18-23 24-31 32-41 42-53 54-65 >65

Age Group

Figure 4: Age Group of Sample – Birmingham (U.K.)

3.1.1.2 Analysis of User Profiles

82% of the sample hold driving license, while 47% are full-time employees and 30% are wholly

retired from work. 73% of the sample has access to use one (1) or two (2) vehicles, as shown in

figure below. Significant is also the percentage (22%) of respondents who have no access in

vehicle use.


Page | 30


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Figure 5: Personal access to number of vehicles – Birmingham (U.K.)

The respondents’ travel options for alternative transportation modes per trip purpose are

shown in Table 1. More specifically, the percentage use of transport modes for each trip

purposes in a weekly basis is presented.

Table 1: Weekly Percentage Use of Transportation Modes for Different Trip Purposes – Birmingham (U.K.)

Work Business Recreation Education Medical Escorting Other

Car as a

Driver 44% 22% 70% 19% 20% 25% 29%

Car as a

Passenger 24% 17% 43% 16% 17% 17% 21%

Car-sharing 17% 15% 20% 16% 16% 16% 16%

Motorcycle 15% 14% 17% 15% 15% 14% 14%

Bicycle 22% 15% 22% 15% 15% 15% 14%

Bike-sharing 14% 14% 15% 13% 14% 14% 13%

Bus 28% 17% 36% 15% 17% 15% 20%

Taxi 16% 14% 25% 14% 15% 13% 15%

Train/Tram 25% 15% 28% 14% 14% 14% 14%


Page | 31


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017


Walk 29% 18% 51% 16% 17% 17% 22%

According to these figures the car, the public transport modes of transport and the means of

transportation on two wheels are used primarily for “work” and “recreation”. The walking is

mainly used for “recreation” trips.

According to Table 2 regarding the use of Traveler Information Systems (TIS) currently used for

the conducting of trips according, the systems that dominate (per transport mode and in order

of preference) are the following:

o car web-sites and traffic programs via radio broadcasting,

o motorcycle web-sites,

o bicycle web-sites and mobile application,

o bus electronic displays at public transport stops, web-sites, electronic displays in

public transport vehicle and mobile application,

o taxi mobile application and web-sites,

o train/ tram web-sites, electronic displays at public transport stops, mobile application

and electronic displays in public transport vehicle,

o walk web-sites and mobile application.

Table 2: Use of TIS for each transportation mode – Birmingham (U.K.)

Car Motorcycle Bicycle Bus Taxi Train/Tram Walk

Web-sites 43% 1% 4% 26% 3% 39% 9%

Mobile Application 23% 0% 4% 17% 5% 21% 9%

Smart On Board

Unit 13% 0% 0% 3% 1% 2% 1%

Variable Message

Signs 19% 0% 0% 8% 0% 5% 0%

Electronic Displays

at Public Transport

stops

3% 0% 0% 43% 1% 28% 1%

Electronic Displays

in the Public

Transport vehicle

2% 0% 0% 19% 1% 13% 1%


Page | 32


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017


SMS services on

demand 3% 0% 0% 2% 3% 1% 1%

Traffic Programs via

Radio Broadcasting 38% 0% 0% 5% 0% 4% 1%

Social Media (e.g.

Twitter) 6% 0% 1% 4% 1% 7% 1%

3.1.1.3 Modal Shift Analysis

The factors that would affect the choice of transport modes in the direction of sustainable

urban mobility and could be affected by the development of the OPTIMUM platform are

examined. The factors are analyzed for promoting the use of public transport, the car-sharing,

the cycling and walking and presented in figures 6, 7, 8, 9 respectively.

3,7%

4,2%

8,8%

17,1%

24,5%

15,7%

20,4%

35,2%

25,0%

21,3%

42,1%

42,1%

64,4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Public transport reliability

Public transport ticketing information & discounts

Less overall transport time

Dedicated bus lane network

Multi-modal connections & hubs

Public transport safety & security

Other

Reduction in carbon emissions

Park and ride facilities

Parking info at Public Transport stations

Nothing would encourage me to use public transport

Public transport accessibility for disabled

Company to commute/ travel with

What would encourage you to consider increasing the use of

Public Transport?

Figure 6: Factors encouraging the use of Public Transport - Birmingham (U.K.)


Page | 33


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

7,5%

7,5%

9,0%

5,0%

10,5%

12,0%

14,0%

19,5%

39,5%

32,0%

28,5%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Finding people to car share with

Knowing/ Trusting the person you are

sharing/ Reliability

Nothing would encourage me to car

share or car share more often

Fuel cost savings

Parking fees

Rewarding incentives

Public transport unavailability

Availability of high occupancy vehicle

lanes

Car pool locations


Other

What would encourage you to consider increasing the use of car-

sharing?

Figure 7: Factors encouraging the use of Car-Sharing - Birmingham (U.K.)

9,1%

5,2%

39,1%

10,5%

11,9%

16,2%

30,5%

30,5%

38,6%

41,9%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

Dedicated cycling paths/ cycling lanes

Improved cycle paths

Weather

Secure and safe cycle parking

Routes information/ navigation

Other

Advice on safer cycling

Nothing would encourage me to cycle/

cycle more often

Availability of bike sharing scheme

Reduction on carbon emissions


bicycle?

Figure 8: Factors encouraging the use of Bicycle - Birmingham (U.K.)


Page | 34


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

9,8%

5,1%

6,5%

13,1%

17,8%

15,0%

20,1%

29,4%

39,3%

48,6%

46,3%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

Footpath conditions

Weather

Safety/ security on the streets

Crossing facilities

Reduced distance travel

Having someone to walk with

Walking route information


Other

Accessibility for disabled

Nothing would encourage me to walk more


walking?

Figure 9: Factors encouraging the use of Walking - Birmingham (U.K.)

The above survey results for each transportation mode leads to the following conclusions:

o The parameter evaluated as the most important by the users in order to increase the

use of Public Transport, is the increased public transport modes’ reliability. Quite

important parameters is to ensure that public transport ticketing information and

discounts are provided, the achievement of less overall transport time and the public

transport safety and security.

o In the case of the use of Car-Sharing the higher percentage of the users declaring

"nothing would encourage me to car share or car share more often". Otherwise,

parameters essential to influence user behavior towards car-sharing are: knowing/

trusting the person you sharing travel, the possibility of finding people to car share with

and the need for fuel cost savings.

o Regarding parameters encouraging the use of Bicycle, the most decisive parameters (in

order of priority) are information for: dedicated cycling paths/ cycling lanes, improved

cycle paths and secure & safe cycle parking, as well as the weather conditions. Very high

percentage of users declares "nothing would encourage me to cycle/ cycle more often".

o Finally, users recognize that they could (for the most part) be encouraged to choose

Walking as a transport mode, in case the following conditions were met: information for

suitable weather and footpath conditions as well as safety/ security on the street. Less

important parameters are the provision of information for crossing facilities, the


Page | 35


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

reduced distance travel information options and the provision of walking route

information.

3.1.1.4 Analysis of Potential User Requirements

The figure below illustrates the average score (in a scale of 1 (low) – 5 (high)) obtained by

respondents for a variety of data content that could be potentially provided by Traveler

Information Services (TIS).

According to data gathered there is no data type that has an average rated value lower than 1.9

and greater than 4.6. By grouping all the average scores per half unit, the respective ranking of

data types is reflected in


Page | 36


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Table 3.

1,9

1,9

2,2

2,4

2,5

2,6

2,7

2,9

2,9

3,0

3,1

3,3

3,6

3,7

3,7

3,9

4,0

4,0

4,3

4,6

0 1 2 3 4 5

Travel times per transport mode

Routing per transport mode

Data for Public Transport arrivals at stops/stations

Shortest travel time navigation by all available transport modes (multi-modal)

Environmental Friendly navigation by all available transport modes (multi-modal)

Parking guidance regarding parking space availability

Demand for car sharing/ car pooling

Traffic conditions (e.g. congestion)

Traffic events (e.g. scheduled maintenance activities)

Traffic incidents (e.g. accidents)

Park&Ride locations

Public Transport interchange hubs

Car-Sharing/ Car Pooling sites

Bus Lanes information

High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes information

Bicycling network (e.g. stations, bicycle routes)

Weather information

Road pricing information

Parking pricing information

Public Transport pricing information

Type of content you consider useful for conducting trips (scale 1- 5)

Figure 10: Scoring of the TIS data content - Birmingham (U.K.)


Page | 37


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Table 3: Rating of the TIS data types – Birmingham (U.K.)

Average

Rating

Intervals

Data Types (mean rate)4 5

>=1.5 & <2 1. Public transport pricing information (1.9) 2. Parking pricing information (1.9)

>=2 & <2.5 1. Road pricing information (2.2) 2. Weather information (2.4)

>=2.5 & <3

1. Bicycling network (e.g. stations, bicycle routs) (2.5) 2. High occupancy vehicle lanes information (2.6) 3. Bus lanes information (2.7) 4. Car sharing/ car-pooling sites (2.9) 5. Public transport interchange hubs (2.9)

>=3 & <3.5 1. Park & Ride locations (3.0) 2. Traffic incidents (e.g. accidents) (3.1) 3. Traffic events (e.g. scheduled maintenance activities) (3.3)

>=3.5 & <4

1. Traffic conditions (e.g. congestion) (3.6) 2. Demand for car sharing/ car-pooling (3.7) 3. Parking guidance regarding parking space availability (3.7) 4. Environmental friendly navigation by all available transport modes

(multi-modal) (3.9)

>=4 & <4.5

1. Shortest travel time navigation by all available transport modes (multi-modal) (4.0)

2. Data for Public Transport arrivals at stops/stations (4.0) 3. Routing per transport mode (4.3)

>=4.5 &

<=5

1. Travel times per transport mode (4.6)

Table 4 presents the data content per trip stage considered more essential for use by travelers

in order to be provided by TIS channels6. Four (4) trip stages are considered for the provision of

travellers’ information via TIS: pre-trip longer than 1 hr., pre-trip less than 1hr, on-trip and post-

trip. The data content is also grouped by taking into account the scoring obtained and

presented in

4 In order of priority from lowest to highest average score

6 Cells highlighted denote data types considered to be the most essential


Page | 38


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Table 3.

Table 4: Use of TIS per Trip Stage - Birmingham (U.K.)

Average

Rating

Intervals

Data Types

Pre-

trip> 1

hour

Pre-

trip≤ 1

hour

On-trip Post-

trip

>=1.5 & <2

Public transport pricing

information 63% 34% 17% 5%

Parking pricing information 49% 30% 27% 7%

>=2 & <2.5 Road pricing information 44% 29% 19% 7%

Weather information 52% 41% 26% 4%

>=2.5 & <3

Bicycling network (e.g. stations,

bicycle routes) 43% 22% 17% 7%

High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes


Bus Lanes information 36% 17% 22% 5%

Car-Sharing/ Car Pooling sites 37% 17% 7% 5%

Public Transport interchange

hubs 50% 30% 17% 5%

>=3 & <3.5

Park&Ride locations 47% 26% 19% 4%

Traffic incidents (e.g. accidents) 40% 47% 46% 5%

Traffic events (e.g. scheduled

maintenance activities) 60% 36% 32% 4%

>=3.5 & <4

Traffic conditions (e.g.

congestion) 47% 43% 45% 4%

Demand for car sharing/ car

pooling 36% 15% 7% 7%

Parking guidance regarding

parking space availability 32% 31% 43% 4%


Page | 39


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Average

Rating

Intervals

Data Types

Pre-

trip> 1

hour

Pre-

trip≤ 1

hour

On-trip Post-

trip

Environmental Friendly

navigation by all available

transport modes (multi-modal)

40% 22% 15% 10%

>=4 & <4.5

Shortest travel time navigation

by all available transport modes

(multi-modal)

57% 36% 15% 5%

Data for Public Transport

arrivals at stops/stations 39% 42% 40% 4%

Routing per transport mode 54% 37% 26% 4%

>=4.5 &

<=5

Travel times per transport

mode 62% 42% 25% 5%

The investigation of the basic parameters that will lead to the identification of user

requirements is completed with the analysis and presentation of the most preferable

communication channels for each data content type, as illustrated in Table 5. According to the

results, for all data content, mobile application and web-sites emerge as the most preferable

communication channel.

Today the majority of the sample uses android mobile phone devices, as shown in figure below,

while a very low percentage (2%) use currently smart watches.


Page | 40


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

What type of mobile device do you currently use?

Other

19%

Windows phone

9%

Android phone

43%

iPhone

29%

Figure 11: Type of mobile device that currently used - Birmingham (U.K.)

Finally, notably, a 34% of the respondents are interested to participate in a focus group study

within the next 2 months. Similarly, 31% of the respondents are interested to participate in live

trials for the development of OPTIMUM platform Pilot Case.


F

Page | 41


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Table 5: User Preference of TIS communication channels – Birmingham (U.K.)

Average Rating

Intervals Data Types

Web

-sit

es

Mo

bile

Ap

plic

atio

n

Smar

t O

n B

oar

d U

nit

Var

iab

le M

essa

ge S

ign

s

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys a

t P

ub

lic

Tran

spo

rt s

top

s

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys in

th

e

Pu

blic

Tra

nsp

ort

veh

icle

SMS

serv

ices

on

dem

and

Traf

fic

Pro

gram

s vi

a R

adio

Bro

adca

stin

g

Soci

al M

edia

(e.

g. T

wit

ter)

>=1.5 & <2

Public Transport pricing

information 60% 33% 8% 10% 21% 14% 9% 4% 4%

Parking pricing information 54% 31% 10% 14% 5% 4% 9% 4% 3%

>=2 & <2.5 Road pricing information 49% 27% 10% 14% 6% 4% 6% 4% 2%

Weather information 56% 42% 10% 12% 9% 8% 8% 20% 5%

>=2.5 & <3


bicycle routes) 47% 29% 5% 8% 6% 3% 5% 4% 4%


information 40% 24% 11% 14% 7% 3% 5% 4% 2%

Bus Lanes information 42% 23% 10% 15% 12% 9% 5% 4% 1%

Car-Sharing/ Car Pooling sites 41% 21% 4% 5% 4% 3% 2% 2% 4%


F

Page | 42


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Average Rating


Web

-sit

es

Mo

bile

Ap

plic

atio

n

Smar

t O

n B

oar

d U

nit

Var

iab

le M

essa

ge S

ign

s

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys a

t P

ub

lic

Tran

spo

rt s

top

s

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys in

th

e

Pu

blic

Tra

nsp

ort

veh

icle

SMS

serv

ices

on

dem

and

Traf

fic

Pro

gram

s vi

a R

adio

Bro

adca

stin

g

Soci

al M

edia

(e.

g. T

wit

ter)


hubs 50% 30% 12% 12% 21% 14% 6% 3% 3%

>=3 & <3.5

Park&Ride locations 49% 29% 10% 13% 9% 5% 5% 4% 2%

Traffic incidents (e.g. accidents) 45% 44% 22% 28% 23% 15% 13% 25% 8%


maintenance activities) 52% 43% 22% 26% 22% 13% 11% 21% 5%

>=3.5 & <4


congestion) 49% 46% 23% 29% 22% 13% 12% 24% 7%


pooling 36% 21% 4% 5% 4% 2% 6% 4% 6%


parking space availability 40% 39% 19% 22% 9% 7% 12% 6% 4%

Environmental Friendly 49% 28% 11% 10% 13% 9% 6% 5% 2%


F

Page | 43


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Average Rating


Web

-sit

es

Mo

bile

Ap

plic

atio

n

Smar

t O

n B

oar

d U

nit

Var

iab

le M

essa

ge S

ign

s

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys a

t P

ub

lic

Tran

spo

rt s

top

s

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys in

th

e

Pu

blic

Tra

nsp

ort

veh

icle

SMS

serv

ices

on

dem

and

Traf

fic

Pro

gram

s vi

a R

adio

Bro

adca

stin

g

Soci

al M

edia

(e.

g. T

wit

ter)



>=4 & <4.5



(multi-modal)

59% 44% 15% 13% 21% 14% 10% 6% 4%


arrivals at stops/stations 41% 39% 24% 19% 56% 36% 7% 5% 4%

Routing per transport mode 57% 43% 21% 15% 30% 20% 11% 10% 4%

>=4.5 & <=5 Travel times per transport

mode 59% 48% 26% 21% 52% 32% 15% 16% 5%


Page | 44


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

3.1.2 Austria (Vienna)


The total number of users who participated in the questionnaire survey for OPTIMUM - Austria

Pilot case 1 was 67. The majority of respondents (94%) belong to the age groups from 24-53

years. In detail, the distribution of respondents by age group shown in figure below.

0,0%1,5%

26,9%

44,8%

22,4%

4,5%

0,0%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

16-18 18-23 24-31 32-41 42-53 54-65 >65

Age Group

Figure 12: Age Group of Sample – Vienna (Austria)


The 92% of the sample are driving license holders, 91% are full-time employees and 48% have

access to use one (1) vehicle. Moreover, as shown in figure below, a significant percentage

(30%) of the sample has no access in vehicle use.


Page | 45


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Personal access to number of vehicles

1

48%

0

30%

>2

8%2

14%

Figure 13: Personal access to number of vehicles – Vienna (Austria)


shown Table 6. More specifically, the percentage use of transport modes for each trip purposes

in a weekly basis is presented.

Table 6: Weekly Percentage Use of Transportation Modes for Different Trip Purposes – Vienna (Austria)


Car as a

Driver

42% 24% 45% 18% 16% 24% 33%

Car as a

Passenger

19% 18% 33% 16% 16% 16% 18%

Car-sharing 19% 15% 21% 15% 15% 15% 16%

Motorcycle 18% 15% 18% 15% 15% 15% 13%

Bicycle 39% 19% 43% 16% 15% 16% 21%

Bike-sharing 15% 15% 16% 15% 15% 15% 13%

Bus 42% 16% 28% 15% 16% 16% 18%

Taxi 15% 15% 21% 15% 15% 15% 15%


Page | 46


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017


Train/Tram 75% 22% 42% 18% 15% 15% 22%

Walk 57% 21% 40% 15% 15% 18% 27%

According to above figures the car and public transport modes of transport are used primarily

for “work”, “leisure” and “other” purposes’ trips. The means of transportation on two wheels

mainly used for “work”, “business” and “leisure” trips. Walking is mainly used for “work” and

leisure trips.




o car web-sites, mobile application and traffic programs via radio broadcasting,

o motorcycle web-sites,


o bus electronic displays at public transport stops, mobile application, electronic

displays in public transport vehicle and web-sites,

o taxi mobile application and web-sites,

o train/ tram electronic displays at public transport stops, mobile application, web-sites

and electronic displays in public transport vehicle,

o walk mobile application and web-sites.

Table 7: Current Use of TIS for each transportation mode – Vienna (Austria)


Web-sites 45% 4% 21% 30% 6% 55% 24%


Smart On Board

Unit

12% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Variable Message

Signs

15% 0% 1% 1% 0% 1% 1%

Electronic Displays

at Public Transport

stops

0% 0% 0% 52% 1% 73% 1%

Electronic Displays

in the Public

0% 0% 0% 33% 0% 42% 0%


Page | 47


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017


Transport vehicle

SMS services on

demand

0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%


Radio Broadcasting

37% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Social Media (e.g.

Twitter)

0% 0% 0% 3% 0% 1% 0%






1,5%

3,1%

4,6%

27,7%

7,7%

24,6%

21,5%

12,3%

30,8%

32,3%

33,9%

53,9%

73,9%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%










Other




What would encourage you to consider increasing the use of Public

Transport?

Figure 14: Factors encouraging the use of Public Transport – Vienna (Austria)


Page | 48


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

12,1%

19,7%

24,2%

21,2%

9,1%

18,2%

31,8%

16,7%

16,7%

21,2%

34,9%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%


Fuel cost savings

Parking fees


Car pool locations


Availability of high occupancy vehicle lanes


Nothing would encourage me to car share or car share more often

Knowing/ Trusting the person you are sharing/ Reliability

Other

What would encourage you to consider increasing the use of car-sharing?

Figure 15: Factors encouraging the use of car-sharing – Vienna (Austria)

4,6%

10,8%

21,5%

7,7%

15,4%

24,6%

67,7%

46,2%

55,4%

56,9%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Weather







cycle more often


Other


What would encourage you to consider increasing the use of bicycle?

Figure 16: Factors encouraging the use of bicycle – Vienna (Austria)


Page | 49


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

3,1%

15,6%

6,3%

10,9%

21,9%

48,4%

31,3%

23,4%

17,2%

31,3%

46,9%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

Weather

Crossing facilities


Footpath conditions






Other


What would encourage you to consider increasing the use of walking?

Figure 17: Factors encouraging the use of Walking – Vienna (Austria)


o The parameters evaluated as the most important in the intention of respondents to

increase the use of Public Transport, is the achievement of less overall transport time

and the ensuring of the public transport modes’ reliability. Minor but enough important

is to ensure public transport ticketing information & discounts, multi-modal connections

& hubs and reductions in carbon emissions.

o In the case of the use of Car-Sharing it seems that, compared to the use of public

transport, are many more parameters that could (almost equally between them)

influence this decision. These parameters (in order of priority) are: the public transport

unavailability, the number and characteristics of the car pool locations, the possibility of

finding people to car share with, the need for fuel cost savings, the reliability (knowing/

trusting the person you sharing are) and the reduction in carbon emissions. Significant is

also the percentage of those who say that "nothing would encourage me to car share or

car share more often".

o With respect to the parameters that would encourage the use of Bicycle, the most

decisive parameters (in order of priority) are: projects and/ or measures to ensure

improved cycle paths, the weather and the existence both dedicated cycling paths/

cycling lanes and secure & safe cycle parking.

o Finally, respondents surveyed recognize that they could (for the most part) be

encouraged to choose Walking as a transport mode if there were the following


Page | 50


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

conditions: the reduced distance travel, suitable weather conditions, safety/ security on

the street and the existence of crossing facilities.


Figure 18 illustrates the average score (in a scale of 1-5) obtained by respondents for a variety

of data content that could be potentially provided by Travelers Information Services (TIS).

According to analysis of results, there is no data content scoring an average value lower than

2.0 and greater than 4.5. By grouping average scores at half unit intervals, the respective

ranking of data content is presented in the Table 8. Notably, the lower average scores are

observed for data content related primarily to the car use, while the higher scores are related

primarily to the use of alternative transport modes. Between the lower and higher boundaries,

the data content for alternative transport modes is the dominant one and shows the dynamic

potential for alternative transportation modes other than car.

3,1

2,6

2,3

2,8

3,4

2,1

2,5

2,3

3,3

2,4

3,7

3,5

3,5

2,1

2,7

2,9

4,0

4,0

3,7

4,4

0 1 2 3 4 5











Park&Ride locations






Weather information





Figure 18: Scoring of the TIS data content - Vienna (Austria)


Page | 51


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Table 8: Rating of the TIS data types – Vienna (Austria)

Average

Rating

Intervals

Data Content (mean rate) 7

>=2 & <2.5

1. Demand for car sharing/ car-pooling (2.1) 2. High occupancy vehicle lanes information (2.1) 3. Car sharing/ car-pooling sites (2.3) 4. Road pricing information (2.3) 5. Park & Ride locations (2.4)

>=2.5 & <3

3. Bus lanes information (2.5) 4. Parking pricing information (2.6) 5. Parking guidance regarding parking space availability (2.7) 6. Weather information (2.8) 7. Environmental friendly navigation by all available transport modes

(multi-modal) (2.9)

>=3 & <3.5 3. Public transport pricing information (3.1) 4. Public transport interchange hubs (3.3) 5. Bicycling network (e.g. stations, bicycle routs) (3.4)

>=3.5 & <4

5. Traffic conditions (e.g. congestion) (3.5) 6. Traffic events (e.g. scheduled maintenance activities) (3.5) 7. Routing per transport mode (3.7) 8. Traffic incidents (e.g. accidents) (3.7)

>=4 & <4.5

4. Data for Public Transport arrivals at stops/stations (4.0) 5. Shortest travel time navigation by all available transport modes

(multi-modal) (4.0) 6. Travel times per transport mode (4.4)

>=4.5 &

<=5

-

Table 9 illustrates the data content per trip stage which considered more essential for use by

travelers; the data content is expected to be provided by TIS channels. Four (4) trip stages are

considered for the provision of travellers information via TIS: pre-trip longer than 1 hr, pre-trip

less than 1hr, on-trip and post-trip. The data content is also grouped by taking into account the

scoring obtained and presented in Table 8.



Page | 52


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Table 9: Use of TIS per Trip Stage - Vienna (Austria)

Average

Rating

Intervals

Data Types Pre-trip>

1 hour

Pre-trip≤

1 hour On-trip Post-trip

>=2 & <2,5


pooling

37% 40% 15% 0%


information

22% 34% 34% 0%


Road pricing information 63% 36% 24% 3%


>=2,5 & <3




parking space availability

16% 46% 63% 3%





51% 45% 27% 13%

>=3 & <3,5


information

67% 43% 25% 4%


hubs

49% 49% 33% 4%


bicycle routes)

58% 54% 42% 3%

>=3,5 & <4


congestion)

13% 78% 67% 1%


maintenance activities)

39% 75% 55% 1%


Page | 53


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Average

Rating

Intervals

Data Types Pre-trip>

1 hour

Pre-trip≤

1 hour On-trip Post-trip


Traffic incidents (e.g. accidents) 12% 69% 76% 3%

>=4 & <4,5

Data for Public Transport arrivals

at stops/stations

22% 49% 73% 3%



(multi-modal)

49% 63% 40% 1%

Travel times per transport mode 49% 76% 57% 6%

The examination of the basic parameters leading to the identification of user requirements is

completed with the evaluation of user about preferable communication channels per content

type, as shown in Table 10. According to the results, for all data content, mobile application

emerges as the most preferable communication channel. As a second choice, in the vast

majority of cases, the web-sites are emerging.

Today the majority of participants use android mobile phone devices, as shown in figure below,

while only 3% currently use smart watches.


Other

19%

Windows phone

4%

Android phone

61%

iPhone

16%

Figure 19: Type of mobile device that currently used - Vienna (Austria)

Finally, 14% of the sample is interested to participate in a focus group study within the next 2

months. Similarly, 12 of the sample are interested to participate in live trials for the

development of OPTIMUM platform Pilot Case.


Page | 54


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Table 10: User Preference of TIS communication channels – Vienna (Austria)

Average

Rating

Intervals

Data Types

Web

-sit

es

Mo

bile

Ap

plic

atio

n

Smar

t O

n B

oar

d U

nit

Var

iab

le M

essa

ge S

ign

s

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys a

t P

ub

lic

Tran

spo

rt s

top

s

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys in

th

e

Pu

blic

Tra

nsp

ort

veh

icle

SMS

serv

ices

on

de

man

d

Traf

fic

Pro

gram

s vi

a R

adio

Bro

adca

stin

g

Soci

al M

edia

(e.

g. T

wit

ter)

>=2 & <2,5 Demand for car sharing/ car

pooling 33% 42% 9% 3% 0% 0% 3% 0% 3%

High Occupancy Vehicle

Lanes information 25% 34% 24% 15% 1% 0% 0% 3% 0%

Car-Sharing/ Car Pooling sites 42% 48% 9% 1% 4% 1% 0% 0% 3%

Road pricing information 42% 51% 31% 18% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Park&Ride locations 45% 52% 28% 12% 3% 0% 3% 3% 0%

>=2,5 & <3 Bus Lanes information 31% 40% 16% 7% 12% 6% 0% 1% 0%





F

Page | 55


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Average

Rating

Intervals

Data Types

Web

-sit

es

Mo

bile

Ap

plic

atio

n

Smar

t O

n B

oar

d U

nit

Var

iab

le M

essa

ge S

ign

s

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys a

t P

ub

lic

Tran

spo

rt s

top

s

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys in

th

e

Pu

blic

Tra

nsp

ort

veh

icle

SMS

serv

ices

on

de

man

d

Traf

fic

Pro

gram

s vi

a R

adio

Bro

adca

stin

g

Soci

al M

edia

(e.

g. T

wit

ter)




transport modes (multi-

modal)

52% 63% 15% 0% 10% 7% 0% 1% 0%

>=3 & <3,5 Public Transport pricing

information 54% 57% 12% 3% 7% 4% 0% 0% 0%


hubs 43% 51% 15% 0% 12% 12% 0% 0% 0%

Bicycling network (e.g.

stations, bicycle routes) 49% 52% 7% 3% 7% 4% 1% 1% 3%

>=3,5 & <4 Traffic conditions (e.g.

congestion) 37% 67% 42% 25% 9% 6% 6% 27% 6%

Traffic events (e.g. scheduled 46% 66% 40% 22% 12% 7% 4% 22% 4%


F

Page | 56


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Average

Rating

Intervals

Data Types

Web

-sit

es

Mo

bile

Ap

plic

atio

n

Smar

t O

n B

oar

d U

nit

Var

iab

le M

essa

ge S

ign

s

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys a

t P

ub

lic

Tran

spo

rt s

top

s

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys in

th

e

Pu

blic

Tra

nsp

ort

veh

icle

SMS

serv

ices

on

de

man

d

Traf

fic

Pro

gram

s vi

a R

adio

Bro

adca

stin

g

Soci

al M

edia

(e.

g. T

wit

ter)

maintenance activities)

Routing per transport mode 54% 67% 22% 3% 12% 9% 0% 4% 0%

Traffic incidents (e.g.

accidents) 36% 64% 42% 27% 10% 6% 4% 27% 4%

>=4 & <4,5 Data for Public Transport


Shortest travel time



modal)

55% 72% 15% 0% 12% 7% 3% 1% 0%


mode 63% 72% 25% 13% 30% 28% 1% 4% 0%


Page | 57


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

3.1.3 Slovenia (Ljubljana)


The total number of users who participated in the questionnaire survey for OPTIMUM -

Slovenia Pilot case 1 was 18. Though the number of participants is lower than the other two

cities of Pilot Case 1 it was deemed sufficient, due to the fact that an evaluation process will

take place during the first phase of the pilots, further enhancing collected requirements.

The majority of respondents (84%) belong to the age groups from 32 to 53 years old. The

distribution of sample by age group is shown in figure below.

0,0% 0,0%

5,3%

36,8%

47,4%

10,5%

0,0%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

16-18 18-23 24-31 32-41 42-53 54-65 >65

Age Group

Figure 20: Age Group of Sample – Ljubljana (Slovenia)


All respondents have driving license holders and are full-time employees. 84% of the sample

has access to use one (1) or two (2) vehicles, as shown in the next figure.


Page | 58


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Personal access to number of vehicles

1

47%

0

0%

>2

16%

2

37%

Figure 21: Access to Private Vehicles – Ljubljana (Slovenia)


shown Table 11. More specifically, the percentage use of transport modes for each trip

purposes in a weekly basis is presented.

Table 11: Weekly Percentage Use of Transportation Modes for Different Trip Purposes – Ljubljana (Slovenia)


Car as a Driver 58% 21% 63% 11% 5% 32% 42%

Car as a

Passenger 11% 16% 21% 5% 5% 16% 26%

Car-sharing 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 16%

Motorcycle 5% 5% 21% 5% 5% 5% 5%

Bicycle 32% 11% 63% 5% 5% 16% 21%

Bike-sharing 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11%

Bus 37% 11% 11% 5% 5% 21% 32%

Taxi 11% 16% 11% 11% 11% 11% 21%

Train/Tram 21% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11%

Walk 21% 21% 63% 11% 11% 26% 21%


Page | 59


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

According to above figures, the car and public transport modes are used primarily for “work”,

“recreation” and “other” purposes’ trips. The transport modes on two wheels are mainly used

for “work” and “recreation” trips. The walking is mainly used for “recreation” trips.




o car web-sites, mobile application and traffic programs via radio broadcasting,

o motorcycle variable message signs,


o bus web-sites, electronic displays at public transport stops, mobile application and

electronic displays in public transport vehicle,

o taxi traffic programs via radio broadcasting,

o train/ tram web-sites, mobile application and electronic displays at public transport

stops,

o walk web-sites, mobile application and traffic programs via radio broadcasting.

Table 12: Current Use of TIS for each transportation mode – Ljubljana (Slovenia)


Web-sites 53% 0% 26% 74% 0% 32% 21%


Smart On Board Unit 5% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0%

Variable Message

Signs 11% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Electronic Displays at

Public Transport

stops

5% 0% 0% 74% 0% 11% 0%

Electronic Displays in

the Public Transport

vehicle

0% 0% 0% 42% 0% 5% 0%

SMS services on

demand 0% 0% 0% 11% 0% 0% 5%


Radio Broadcasting 58% 0% 5% 5% 5% 5% 11%


Page | 60


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017


Social Media (e.g.

Twitter) 16% 0% 0% 5% 0% 5% 5%






0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

5,3%

21,1%

15,8%

31,6%

26,3%

31,6%

42,1%

52,6%

73,7%

89,5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%










Other




What would encourage you to consider increasing the use of Public

Transport?

Figure 22: Factors encouraging the use of Public Transport – Ljubljana (Slovenia)


Page | 61


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

5,3%

15,8%

10,5%

26,3%

21,1%

26,3%

26,3%

47,4%

47,4%

47,4%

47,4%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

Knowing/ Trusting the person you are sharing/ Reliability


Fuel cost savings

Car pool locations

Parking fees


Availability of high occupancy vehicle lanes


Nothing would encourage me to car share or car share more often


Other

What would encourage you to consider increasing the use of car-sharing?

Figure 23: Factors encouraging for the use of Car-Sharing – Ljubljana (Slovenia)

5,3%

5,3%

21,1%

26,3%

15,8%

10,5%

42,1%

68,4%

79,0%

63,2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Weather









cycle more often

Other

What would encourage you to consider increasing the use of bicycle?

Figure 24: Factors encouraging for the use of Bicycle – Ljubljana (Slovenia)


Page | 62


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

0,0%

0,0%

21,1%

10,5%

31,6%

15,8%

31,6%

26,3%

52,6%

52,6%

57,9%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Weather


Footpath conditions






Crossing facilities

Other


What would encourage you to consider increasing the use of walking?

Figure 25: Factors encouraging for the use of Walking – Ljubljana (Slovenia)


o The parameters evaluated as most important for increasing the use of Public Transport,

is the achievement of less overall transport time and the public transport reliability.

Quite important factors are the provision of dedicated bus lane network and multi-

modal connections and hubs. Reductions in carbon emissions and the provision of public

transport ticketing information & discounts are also contributing factors.

o For Car-Sharing, it seems that, compared to public transport use, there are many more

parameters that could influence the increase usage; the parameters are: knowing/

trusting the person you sharing travel, the increased capability of finding people to car

share with, the need for fuel cost savings and the number and characteristics of the car

pool locations. Significant are also the parameters: provision of parking fees, the public

transport unavailability and the reduction in carbon emissions.

o Regarding the factors encouraging Bicycle use, the most decisive parameters (in order of

priority) are: provision of secure & safe cycle parking and improved cycle paths as well

as the weather conditions. Less significant parameters is the existence of dedicated

cycling paths/ cycling lanes.

o Finally, users recognize that they could be encouraged to increase Walking in their

travel, the following conditions are met: suitable weather and footpath conditions as

well as safety/ security on the street. Less important parameters seem to be the

reduced distance travel and the reduction on carbon emissions.


Page | 63


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017


Figure 26 illustrates the average score (in a scale of 1-5) obtained by respondents for a variety

of data content that could be potentially provided by Travelers Information Services (TIS).

According to analysis of results, there is no data content scoring an average value lower than

2.5 and greater than 4.6. By grouping average scores at half unit intervals, the respective

ranking of data content is presented in Table 13.

3,0

2,7

2,4

3,8

3,4

3,1

3,5

2,5

3,5

3,8

3,5

3,5

3,6

2,6

3,6

3,6

4,5

4,6

3,8

4,4

0 1 2 3 4 5











Park&Ride locations






Weather information





Figure 26: Scoring of the TIS data content - Ljubljana (Slovenia)


Page | 64


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Table 13: Rating of the TIS data types - Ljubljana (Slovenia)

Average

Rating

Intervals

Data Types (mean rate) 8

>=2 & <2.5 -

>=2.5 & <3 8. Car sharing/ car-pooling sites (2.8) 9. Road pricing information (2.8) 10. High occupancy vehicle lanes information (2.9)

>=3 & <3.5

6. Demand for car sharing/ car-pooling (3.0) 7. Parking pricing information (3.1) 8. Public transport pricing information (3.3) 9. Bus lanes information (3.3) 10. Environmental friendly navigation by all available transport modes

(multi-modal) (3.3)

>=3.5 & <4

9. Park & Ride locations (3.5) 10. Weather information (3.6) 11. Public transport interchange hubs (3.6) 12. Bicycling network (e.g. stations, bicycle routs) (3.6) 13. Parking guidance regarding parking space availability (3.7) 14. Traffic incidents (e.g. accidents) (3.7) 15. Traffic conditions (e.g. congestion) (3.8) 16. Traffic events (e.g. scheduled maintenance activities) (3.8)

>=4 & <4.5 7. Routing per transport mode (4.1) 8. Shortest travel time navigation by all available transport modes

(multi-modal) (4.4) >=4.5 &

<=5

2. Travel times per transport mode (4.5) 3. Data for Public Transport arrivals at stops/stations (4.6)

Table 14 presents the data content per trip stage considered more essential for use by

travelers in order to be provided by TIS channels. Four (4) trip stages are considered for the

provision of travellers’ information via TIS: pre-trip longer than 1 hr, pre-trip less than 1hr, on-

trip and post-trip. The data content is also grouped by taking into account the scoring obtained

and presented in Table 13.



Page | 65


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Table 14: Use of TIS per Trip Stage - Ljubljana (Slovenia)

Average

Rating

Intervals

Data Types

Pre-

trip> 1

hour

Pre-

trip≤ 1

hour

On-trip Post-

trip

>=2 & <2.5 - - - - -

>=2.5 & <3


Road pricing information 53% 37% 26% 0%


Lanes information 42% 47% 42% 0%

>=3 & <3.5


pooling 63% 26% 16% 0%








modal)

63% 16% 32% 11%

>=3.5 & <4




hubs 53% 53% 53% 0%


stations, bicycle routes) 68% 42% 42% 0%


parking space availability 21% 32% 63% 5%


accidents) 11% 58% 74% 0%


Page | 66


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Average

Rating

Intervals

Data Types

Pre-

trip> 1

hour

Pre-

trip≤ 1

hour

On-trip Post-

trip


congestion) 26% 53% 58% 0%


maintenance activities) 47% 37% 53% 0%

>=4 & <4.5





modal)

63% 37% 42% 0%

>=4.5 & <5


mode 68% 37% 32% 0%


arrivals at stops/stations 32% 47% 37% 0%

The investigation of the basic parameters that will lead to the identification of user

requirements is completed with the analysis and presentation of the most preferable

communication channels for each type of data, as shown in Table 15. According to the results,

web-sites and mobile application emerge as the most preferable communication channels.

The majority of the sample is currently using android mobile phone devices (figure 27), while a

very low percentage currently use smart watches.

Finally, a 39% of the respondents are interested to participate in a focus group study within the

next 2 months. Similarly, 37% of the respondents are interested to participate in live trials for

the development of OPTIMUM platform Pilot Case.


Page | 67


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Table 15: User Preference of TIS communication channels - Ljubljana (Slovenia)

Average

Rating

Intervals

Data Types

Web

-sit

es

Mo

bile

Ap

plic

atio

n

Smar

t O

n B

oar

d U

nit

Var

iab

le M

essa

ge S

ign

s

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys a

t

Pu

blic

Tra

nsp

ort

sto

ps

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys in

th

e

Pu

blic

Tra

nsp

ort

veh

icle

SMS

serv

ices

on

dem

and

Traf

fic

Pro

gram

s vi

a R

adio

Bro

adca

stin

g

Soci

al M

edia

(e.

g. T

wit

ter)

>=2 & <2.5 - - - - - - - - - -

>=2.5 & <3 Car-Sharing/ Car Pooling sites 68% 53% 0% 0% 5% 11% 5% 5% 0%

Road pricing information 79% 53% 5% 5% 5% 0% 5% 5% 0%


Lanes information 63% 63% 5% 11% 11% 11% 0% 5% 0%

>=3 & <3.5 Demand for car sharing/ car

pooling 63% 68% 5% 0% 5% 0% 16% 5% 5%



information 84% 58% 0% 0% 21% 21% 11% 5% 0%

Bus Lanes information 79% 63% 0% 0% 42% 37% 5% 5% 0%

Environmental Friendly 74% 74% 11% 0% 5% 0% 11% 5% 0%


Page | 68


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Average

Rating

Intervals

Data Types

Web

-sit

es

Mo

bile

Ap

plic

atio

n

Smar

t O

n B

oar

d U

nit

Var

iab

le M

essa

ge S

ign

s

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys a

t

Pu

blic

Tra

nsp

ort

sto

ps

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys in

th

e

Pu

blic

Tra

nsp

ort

veh

icle

SMS

serv

ices

on

dem

and

Traf

fic

Pro

gram

s vi

a R

adio

Bro

adca

stin

g

Soci

al M

edia

(e.

g. T

wit

ter)



modal)

>=3.5 & <4 Park&Ride locations 74% 68% 5% 0% 11% 5% 5% 5% 5%



hubs 74% 58% 11% 11% 32% 26% 5% 11% 0%


stations, bicycle routes) 79% 53% 0% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 5%




accidents) 68% 74% 5% 16% 11% 5% 16% 37% 5%

Traffic conditions (e.g. 68% 68% 5% 11% 16% 5% 21% 42% 5%


Page | 69


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Average

Rating

Intervals

Data Types

Web

-sit

es

Mo

bile

Ap

plic

atio

n

Smar

t O

n B

oar

d U

nit

Var

iab

le M

essa

ge S

ign

s

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys a

t

Pu

blic

Tra

nsp

ort

sto

ps

Elec

tro

nic

Dis

pla

ys in

th

e

Pu

blic

Tra

nsp

ort

veh

icle

SMS

serv

ices

on

dem

and

Traf

fic

Pro

gram

s vi

a R

adio

Bro

adca

stin

g

Soci

al M

edia

(e.

g. T

wit

ter)

congestion)


maintenance activities) 74% 68% 11% 11% 16% 5% 16% 37% 0%

>=4 & <4.5 Routing per transport mode 84% 74% 21% 5% 37% 21% 5% 11% 0%




modal)

68% 79% 16% 5% 21% 16% 11% 21% 0%

>=4.5 & <=5 Travel times per transport

mode 84% 79% 21% 5% 53% 26% 11% 11% 0%




Page | 70


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017


Other

9%Windows phone

0%

Android phone

82%

iPhone

9%

Figure 27: Type of mobile device that currently used - Ljubljana (Slovenia)

3.2 Pilot Case 2: “Proactive Charging Schemes for Freight Transport” The survey oriented to major stakeholders participated in the development of the Pilot Case 2.

Three (3) stakeholders completed the questionnaire:

o Infrastructures de Portugal, S.A – Motorway Operator

o Luis Simoes – Freight Operator

o Pereira & Pestana Transportes – Freight Operator

Consequently, the methodology of development of user requirements is based on qualitative

responses of the small sample.

However, the low rate of responses does not jeopardize the pilot as IP is the public

infrastructure manager (which president is nominated directly from the government) and

highway concessionary entity (controlling 4 sub-concessionaries). Their position allows them to

have the big picture of the Portuguese scenario on the entire national road network

(encompassing national and highway roads).

Luis Simoes the freight logistic operator by its dimension allows them to have the full

comprehension of the Portuguese scenario on the freight logistics matters.

As they operate both with sub-contracting small logistic operators and own fleet they are in the

position to understand the sector needs and respond for the sector desires. Therefore, they can

represent the Portuguese and Spanish logistic market.


Page | 71


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

In the following paragraphs, a description of stakeholders’ profiles and the existing ITS

conditions are presented.

3.2.1 Freight/ Logistic Operator

Both Freight Operators experience exceeds 10 years. The type of drivers used for commercial

transport are owned operator leased to a carrier or/ and owned operator under own operating

company.

The operators ship containers and bulk units while dangerous goods transport is also

undertaken. One operator possesses 2.000 vehicles while the loaded cargo trips per week per

vehicle lies within 5 to 10.

Both operators have installed on-board unit(s) for the following scope:

o Detection of vehicle location.

o Detection of drivers’ behavior.

o Detection of fuel consumption.

o Vehicle identification.

Both operators use electronic fee collection with the use of a transponder that identifies the

tolls use, road section, highway entrances and exits. The motorway/ toll operator sends a

monthly invoice with registered services. Finally, it seems that no discount benefits are used for

the toll road network.

Both operators collecting the following data:

o Trip origin/ destination data.

o Scheduled route.

o Trip estimated length.

o Fuel consumption.

o Vehicle type/ size.

o Type of freight cargo.

It seems that vehicle weight-axle loads are not collected by none freight operator. One freight

operator possesses a dispatching centre, while the other freight operator is based mainly on

experience regarding traffic conditions. Additionally, trip origin/ destination data and trip

estimated length can be currently provided to an external system by one freight operator.

The route choice decision is solely taken based on fleet operator plan, while, depending on the

freight operator, the final route selection is based on predetermined route or free choice

(based on experience). The main current criteria for the route choice selection are, as it would

be expected, primarily the cost and secondly the travel time. Moreover, the main parameters of

trip costs are fuel and toll costs, while one freight operator includes also the delay costs. Both


Page | 72


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

operators consider that minimum trip travel time and minimum trip generalised cost (e.g.

operating cost plus toll cost) would be very useful for their route selection data.

Both freight operators would require being informed about the pertaining road pricing policy

24 hrs before the trip execution. Both operators consider acquiring available as much as data

(such as toll costs, traffic conditions) for pre-trip planning and pre-trip before trip start. Traffic

conditions and incidents play significant role also for on-trip information.

Both operators seem to agree that the most useful communication channels are web-sites,

responsive mobile site and native mobile application.

Worth mentioning the these two large and well acknowledged freight operators involved in our survey operate mostly in Portugal and Spain and the decision for the routes to be executed either using highways/tolls or the national road system, lies exclusively on their side as operators, therefore the truck drivers are obliged to follow strictly the instructions provided. This fact was the reason that they weren’t included in the context of the survey performed. The interactions with them was through specialised training and awareness programmes as well as through their response to questionnaires - aside from OPTIMUM work – providing a basis for their econometric models.

3.2.2 Highway Operator

The motorway operator (Infraestruturas de Portugal, S.A) is established more than 10 years in

Portugal road network, showcasing a new concept approach of toll charging, the highway

operator – IP Concessionary, an entity that rules some other sub-concessionaries. This new

structure is responsible to gather data and feedback from multiple sub-concessionaries

conveying potential requests from the end users in general and logistic operators in particular.

All important highway management actions are currently undertaken such as:

o Traffic management & monitoring

o Incident management & monitoring

o Toll highway management

o Road maintenance

o Travellers’ information

For the above highway management service, ITS have been deployed to support the motorway

operator. More specifically, the following ITS services are:

o Traffic and incident control via on-site video detection cameras. This information is

available to the motorway’s operator internet site.


Page | 73


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

o Traffic and incident information is diffused via on-site Variable Message Signs in order to

inform travellers about pertaining traffic conditions and alternative routes on traffic

congestion, traffic incidents any other traffic events.

o Cameras images are also used for detection of any road irregularities in order to support

maintenance activities.

o Traffic detectors are installed on site in order to send traffic related data (traffic flows,

speed) to the Motorway’s operator Control Centre.

o To ensure acceptable road level of service, motorway’s operator staff register in real-

time any observed events.

Regarding the toll collection system, three (3) types are available manual, coins and electronic

fee collection system (EFC). Emphasizing to the latter, a multi-lane free flow system is

operational which is fully electronic ensuring the uninterrupted continuous vehicles’ flow. The

toll collection is done for EFC by using:

o DSRC (Dedicated Short Range Communications) technology based on the emission and

reading of microwave beams, identifying vehicles by reading an on-board unit.

o Automatic License Plate Recognition (ALPR) allowing toll collection of vehicles with no

on-board unit, through photo (photo-tolling).

Moreover, the toll collected data by the road side equipment is sent to the operational back-

office and afterwards, automatically are received to the commercial back office. Manual

intervention sometimes is required to validate a licence plate.

Regarding toll pricing policy, according to national legislation, a 15% discount rate can be

applied on some highways. Besides, special discounts at national highway network are provided

for HGV (10% daytime, 25% at night) and motorbikes (30%).

The motorway operator would need the following type of data by the freight operator:

o Trip origin/ destination data.

o Scheduled route.

o Willingness to pay for the scheduled route.

o Vehicle weigh axle load.

The freight trip data would be required from the motorway operator at a minimum time

interval of 24hrs.

According to motorway operator, the main data required for the deployment of a dynamic

freight vehicles toll discount system are total traffic flows, heavy vehicle flows, level of service

and environmental emissions.


Page | 74


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

The desired target group for the diffusion of information are both at enterprise and at public

level, while the main communication channels are considered the Variable Message Signs and

Social Media.

Finally, the motorway operator considers useful the following technological systems for

evaluation of traffic strategies:

o Traffic flow detectors.

o Incident detection cameras.

o HGV dispatch centre.

o Social media.

The added value of this pilot is to proof it is feasible to develop a tool with high synergies to the

road and logistics operator needs as they are involved in the project and their views are being

provided and taken into account. A special web interface meeting their specific needs of

highway and logistics operators alike is to be designed, reflecting a real market need, opening a

new business era in the field of toll pricing process

3.2.3 Truck Drivers Despite the fact that this pilot focuses on freight forwarders and highway operators, truck

drivers were understood as an important user group, which was worthwhile to have their

insight therefore a survey was conducted to gather their views and better understand the

concrete operational procedures performed within the project. In specific, further

requirements analysis was carried out in WP4 for the development of the charging model, in

the framework of which data were collected from a sample of 50 drivers and 25 freight

operators. (e.g. route choice model).


Page | 75


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

3.3 Pilot Case 3: “Integrated Car2x Communication Platform” 3.3.1 Sampling Size Twenty-six (26) users participated on this survey. The majority of sample lies within ageing

group 32-45 (57%) and consists mainly from males (77%), as it is illustrated in figure 28 and 29

respectively. Age Group

32-45

57%

23-32

15%

18-23

12%

14-18

4%

>65

4%46-64

8%

Figure 28: Age Group of Sample Gender

Female

23%

Male

77%

Figure 29: Gender of Sample

3.3.2 Analysis of User Profiles 69% of users are travelling as drivers while 31% of users are travelling as passengers.


Page | 76


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Please state whether you travel as Driver or Passenger

Driver

69%

Passenger

31%

Figure 30: Proportion of Users travelling as Drivers or Passengers

The majority of sample currently uses ITS services for pre-trip planning (84%), while significant

percentage uses ITS service during the trip (Table 16).

Table 16: Existing Use of ITS Services per Trip Stage

Trip Stage ITS services use

Pre-trip 84%

On- trip 40%

Post trip 8%

Web-sites are the most popular ITS travellers information systems (92%), while quite commonly

used communication channels are Traffic Programs via Radio Broadcasting (39%), Smart On

Board Units (35%). Mobile applications are used by 23% of the sample. Variable Message Signs

unexpectedly present low usage (8%), similar to the use of Social Media. Figure 31 illustrates

the existing use of ITS Communication Channels.


Page | 77


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

4%

8%

8%

19%

23%

35%

39%

92%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

SMS services on demand

Variable Message Signs

Social Media (e.g. Twitter)

Responsive Mobile Site

Native Mobile Application

Smart On Board Unit

Traffic Programs via Radio

Broadcasting

Web-sites

Existing Use of ITS Communication Channels

Figure 31: Existing Use of ITS Communication Channels

3.3.3 Analysis of Environmental & Safety Aspects

The environmental and safety aspects seem to be of high interest for the CAR2X users. As it

would be expected, the acceptance of using a Smart Driving Device to reduce fuel consumption

is very high (80%), where 44% and 36% evaluate as “very positive” and “usually positive” (figure

32).

0,0%

8,0%

12,0%

36,0%

44,0%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Negative Usually negative Neutral Usually positive Positive

Would you consider to use smart driving advice in order to reduce

fuel consumption?

Figure 32: Potential Use of Smart Driving Device to Reduce Fuel Consumption

The potential use of Smart Driving Device for reduction of CO2 emissions is quite high, but lower

than fuel consumption, since 19% and 46% of users evaluate as “very positive” and “usually

positive” respectively (figure 33).


Page | 78


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

0,0%

19,2%

15,4%

46,2%

19,2%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%


Would you consider to use smart driving advice in order to

reduce CO2 emissions?

Figure 33: Potential Use of Smart Driving Device to Reduce CO2 Emissions

The potential use of safety related information in order to adjust driving behaviour can be

considered very high, since 35% and 46% of users evaluate as “very positive” and “usually

positive” respectively (figure 34).

0,0%

3,9%

15,4%

46,2%

34,6%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%


Would you consider to get information on safety related matters in

order to adjust your driving behaviour?

Figure 34: Potential Use of Real-Time Data on Safety to Adjust Driving Behaviour

3.3.4 Analysis of Potential User Requirements

The users evaluated based on rating scale from 1 (low) to 5 (high) the type of content which is

considered useful for sustainability and safety/ security purposes. Each content type was

ranked separately for fuel consumption and CO2 emissions control. The respondents’ results are


Page | 79


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

shown in Table 17 and


Page | 80


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Table 189.

It is seen that commonly useful data content are considered for both sustainability and safety/

security purposes the shortest travel time navigation, the traffic conditions and traffic incidents

(score over 4.00). Those variables present also high score for fuel consumption and CO2

emissions control. “Parking guidance within cities” and Route trace profiling” score quite high

for sustainability and safety/ security purposes and are considered useful in order to control

fuel consumption.

Environmental friendly navigation is considered quite useful by the users in order to control CO2

emissions (3.65).

Table 17: Rating of Usefulness regarding Sustainability Content Type for Fuel Consumption

& CO2 Emissions Control

Content Type Fuel

consumption

CO2

Emissions

Route trace profiling 3.66 2.92

Social media as data source 2.77 2.28

Shortest travel time navigation 4.16 3.71

Environmental Friendly navigation 3.56 3.65

Parking guidance in city areas availability 3.65 3.21

Parking guidance along highways availability 3.04 2.67

Parking reservation on highways 2.40 2.21

Traffic conditions (e.g. congestion) 4.08 3.74

Traffic incidents 4.00 3.56

Information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific

route 3.36 3.00

Information on car maintenance issues 2.96 2.57

Information on closest gas station 3.52 2.74

Information on road assistance services 2.80 2.17

9 Highlighted cells are the most essential ones


Page | 81


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Table 18: Rating of Usefulness regarding Safety & Security Content Type for Fuel

Consumption & CO2 Emissions Control

Content Type Fuel

consumption

CO2

Emissions

Route trace profiling 3.66 2.92

Social media as data source 2.77 2.28

Shortest travel time navigation 4.16 3.71

Environmental Friendly navigation 3.56 3.65

Parking guidance in city areas availability 3.65 3.21

Parking guidance along highways availability 3.04 2.67

Parking reservation on highways 2.40 2.21

Traffic conditions (e.g. congestion) 4.08 3.74

Traffic incidents 4.00 3.56

Information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for

specific route 3.36 3.00

Information on car maintenance issues 2.96 2.57

Information on closest gas station 3.52 2.74

Information on road assistance services 2.80 2.17

The users rating of data content per trip stage was evaluated by users, as shown in


Page | 82


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Table 19. As it would be expected the majority of information is considered useful during the

travellers’ trip.

Regarding sustainability aspects, the users seem to request on-trip information regarding traffic

conditions, traffic incidents, shortest travel time navigation, route trace profile, parking

guidance within cities, weather conditions and information regarding closest gas stations. On

the other hand, post trip information is considered of low usefulness. Pre-trip information is

considered useful for route trace profile, shortest travel time navigation and weather

conditions.

Regarding safety/ security aspects, the users seem to request on-trip information regarding

traffic incidents, traffic conditions, weather conditions, sudden changes on average speed and

information regarding black spots.

Finally, it should be noted that social media are considered as a data source for pre-trip

planning but the score is not very high (3.08).


Page | 83


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Table 19: Rating of Data Content Usefulness per Trip Stage

Data Content Pre-trip On-trip Post-trip

Sustainability

Route trace profiling 4.46 3.96 1.64

Social media as data source 3.08 2.64 1.88

Shortest travel time navigation 4.31 4.19 1.84

Environmental Friendly navigation 3.27 3.31 1.88

Parking guidance in city areas availability 3.00 3.88 1.60

Parking guidance along highways availability 2.58 3.31 1.52

Parking reservation on highways 2.34 2.65 1.36

Traffic conditions (e.g. congestion) 3.27 4.23 1.68

Traffic incidents 3.42 4.19 1.56


specific route 3.58 3.77 1.60

Information on car maintenance issues 2.76 2.84 1.96

Information on closest gas station 2.56 3.66 1.40

Information on road assistance services 2.52 3.15 1.64

Safety & Security

Sudden changes on average speed 2.25 3.58 1.48

Information on accident black spots 2.60 3.54 1.58

Traffic conditions (e.g. congestion) 3.12 4.31 1.50

Traffic incidents 3.20 4.46 1.46


specific route 3.19 3.76 1.58

E-call compatibility 2.29 2.83 1.58

Information on closest medical services (POIs) 2.71 3.13 1.74

For each trip stage, the data are classified according to “data origin”, i.e. (a) Static, (b) Real-time

and (c) Forecasts. The users’ evaluation is shown in Table 20. Real-time data refer to data

detected and presented to travellers within a maximum time interval of 10 minutes. Forecasted

data refer to short-term forecasts in a time interval longer than 30 minutes.

Regarding on-trip data which are the major users’ needs, as it would be expected, real-time

data present the higher score. The users responses related to data content are consistent with

the results of Table 16 (Existing Use of ITS Services per Trip Stage). Forecasted data seem to be

essential for traffic conditions, traffic incidents and weather conditions.


Page | 84


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

On the other hand, for pre-trip planning, the “data origin” seems to be irrelevant in the

majority of cases; exception is the route trace profile and the shortest travel time navigation for

static “data origin”. This finding seems to be quite surprising, since for pre-trip planning

purposes, it would be expected that forecasted data would be considered more essential by the

users.

Table 20: Rating of Data Content in terms of “Data Origin”

Data Content

Pre-trip On-trip

Static Real-

time Forecasts Static

Real-

time Forecasts

Sustainability

Route trace profiling 3.87 2.91 2.95 3.35 3.57 3.00

Social media as data

source 2.76 2.58 2.48 2.24 2.44 2.41


navigation 3.87 3.00 3.09 3.38 3.65 3.05


navigation 3.23 2.95 2.78 2.75 2.95 2.68

Parking guidance in city

areas availability 3.19 3.25 3.22 3.20 3.77 3.24

Parking guidance along

highways availability 2.72 2.96 2.61 2.85 3.14 2.60

Parking reservation on

highways 2.80 2.50 2.86 2.95 2.81 2.65


congestion) 3.57 3.31 3.35 3.62 4.19 3.76

Traffic incidents 3.32 3.05 3.00 3.72 4.20 4.05

Information regarding

weather

conditions/forecasts for

specific route

3.28 3.05 3.27 3.19 3.60 3.76

Information on car

maintenance issues 2.86 2.78 2.61 2.70 2.81 2.50

Information on closest gas

station 3.05 2.91 2.68 3.26 3.43 2.85


Page | 85


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Data Content

Pre-trip On-trip

Static Real-

time Forecasts Static

Real-

time Forecasts

Information on road

assistance services 2.71 2.56 2.61 2.70 2.65 2.57

Safety & Security

Sudden changes on

average speed 2.33 2.91 2.43 3.05 3.62 3.05

Information on accident

black spots 3.09 3.13 2.78 2.74 3.38 3.05


congestion) 3.37 3.35 3.17 3.67 3.96 3.91

Traffic incidents 3.48 3.57 3.45 3.52 3.96 4.09


weather


specific route

3.09 3.23 3.09 3.05 3.52 3.33

E-call compatibility 2.65 2.83 2.43 2.76 3.23 2.90

Information on closest

medical services (POIs) 2.95 2.95 2.82 3.24 3.46 3.14

The users’ perspective regarding potential ITS communication channels for sustainability

purposes is shown in Table 21. As it is seen, the communication channels presenting high

potential use are the web-sites, the native mobile application, the responsive mobile site and

the Smart On Board unit. Native mobile application and Smart on board unit score high in more

data variables, while web-sites and responsive mobile sites score high only for route trace

profile. Interestingly, Variable Message Signs and Social Media are not considered by users as

significant ITS traveller information services.


Page | 86


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Table 21: Potential use of ITS Communication Channels for Sustainability purposes

Data Content for

Sustainability

Web

-sit

es

Res

po

nsi

ve

Mo

bile

Sit

e

Nat

ive

Mo

bile

Ap

plic

atio

n

SMS

serv

ice

on

dem

and

Smar

t O

n B

oar

d

Un

it

Var

iab

le M

essa

ge

Sign

s

Soci

al M

edia

(e.

g.

Twit

ter)

Pre

ss

Route trace

profiling 4.17 3.74 4.00 2.38 3.61 2.91 2.33 1.85

Social media as data

source 2.91 2.82 3.05 2.00 2.67 2.24 2.45 1.53


navigation 3.21 3.46 4.17 2.16 3.91 2.79 1.90 1.84

Environmental

Friendly navigation 2.62 2.91 3.27 2.25 3.05 2.50 2.05 1.75

Parking guidance in

city areas

availability

2.74 3.29 3.55 2.79 3.50 2.89 2.00 1.90

Parking guidance

along highways

availability

2.38 3.00 3.30 2.45 3.38 2.45 1.84 1.67

Parking reservation

on highways 2.33 2.64 3.09 1.95 3.09 2.16 1.65 1.53

Traffic conditions

(e.g. congestion) 2.87 3.32 3.61 2.63 3.64 2.95 2.00 1.76

Traffic incidents 2.83 3.27 3.87 2.48 3.73 2.85 1.90 1.65

Information

regarding weather

conditions/forecasts

for specific route

3.33 3.41 3.48 2.35 3.55 2.63 1.80 2.00

Information on car

maintenance issues 2.32 2.62 3.05 2.10 3.13 2.00 1.50 1.70

Information on

closest gas station 2.58 2.86 3.43 2.55 3.46 2.47 1.70 1.80

Information on road

assistance services 2.48 2.73 3.22 2.25 3.23 2.45 1.60 1.90


Page | 87


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

The users’ perspective regarding potential ITS communication channels for safety and security

purposes is shown in Table 22. Smart on board unit is considered as the most essential

communication channel in order to provide information related to sudden changes on speed,

traffic conditions, black spots, traffic incidents and closest medical points. Native mobile

application is considered useful to provide information related to traffic conditions and traffic

incidents. Interestingly, Variable Message Signs are not considered as vital ITS Communication

Channel by the users.

Table 22: Potential use of ITS Communication Channels for Safety & Security purposes

Data Content for

Safety/Security

Web

-sit

es

Res

po

nsi

ve

Mo

bile

Sit

e

Nat

ive

Mo

bile

Ap

plic

atio

n

SMS

serv

ice

on

dem

and

Smar

t O

n B

oar

d

Un

it

Var

iab

le M

essa

ge

Sign

s

Soci

al M

edia

(e.

g.

Twit

ter)

Pre

ss

Sudden changes on

average speed 2.24 2.68 2.95 2.10 3.65 2.67 1.85 1.68

Information on accident

black spots 3.05 3.32 3.41 2.20 3.65 2.50 2.00 1.65


congestion) 3.05 3.46 3.83 2.75 3.79 3.09 2.15 1.67

Traffic incidents 2.82 3.17 3.76 2.80 3.75 3.09 2.10 1.72


weather


specific route

3.18 3.32 3.46 2.80 3.50 2.64 2.05 1.71

E-call compatibility 2.18 2.64 3.05 2.21 3.25 2.35 1.70 1.55

Information on closest

medical services (POIs) 2.73 2.95 3.09 2.68 3.67 2.43 2.00 1.70

Finally for sustainability and safety/ security purposes, the factors for actual ITS use are

evaluated by the users. The following factors are evaluated.

o Access to Travellers Information Channels (TIS).

o Data reliability. The degree to which disseminated data are stable and consistent.

o Data accurateness. The degree of precision for disseminated data.

o Data refresh/ data updating data.

o Validity. The degree to which disseminated data are valid.


Page | 88


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

The perceived factors determining the use of ITS are shown in Table 23. As it would be probably

expected, all factors are considered important and affect the actual ITS use. The target of ITS

systems should meet those factors in order achieve actual use, otherwise, the system become

obsolete by the users.

Table 23: Perceived Factors Determining the use of ITS

Data Type

Acc

ess

to T

IS

(co

mm

un

icat

ion

chan

nel

s)

Dat

a R

elia

bili

ty

Dat

a A

ccu

rate

ne

ss

Dat

a R

efre

sh/

Dat

a

Up

dat

ing

Rat

e

Val

idit

y

Sustainability

Route trace profiling 3.70 4.27 4.23 4.11 3.75

Social media as data source 3.06 3.38 3.20 3.32 3.10

Shortest travel time navigation 3.90 4.05 4.27 3.74 3.50

Environmental Friendly navigation 3.16 3.30 3.35 3.05 3.05

Parking guidance in city areas availability 3.58 3.81 3.76 3.72 3.68

Parking guidance along highways availability 3.21 3.57 3.48 3.22 3.26

Parking reservation on highways 2.84 2.95 2.91 2.78 2.78

Traffic conditions (e.g. congestion) 4.00 4.00 3.95 3.94 3.79

Traffic incidents 4.00 3.95 3.86 3.83 3.83

Information regarding weather

conditions/forecasts for specific route 3.74 3.81 3.81 3.78 3.72

Information on car maintenance issues 3.05 3.38 3.30 3.00 3.00

Information on closest gas station 3.74 3.62 3.52 3.35 3.32

Information on road assistance services 3.26 3.33 3.29 3.06 3.05

Safety & Security

Sudden changes on average speed 3.22 3.35 3.40 3.42 3.16


Page | 89


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Data Type

Acc

ess

to T

IS

(co

mm

un

icat

ion

chan

nel

s)

Dat

a R

elia

bili

ty

Dat

a A

ccu

rate

ne

ss

Dat

a R

efre

sh/

Dat

a

Up

dat

ing

Rat

e

Val

idit

y

Information on accident black spots 3.79 3.57 3.82 3.44 3.26

Traffic conditions (e.g. congestion) 4.21 4.09 4.05 3.89 3.79

Traffic incidents 4.26 3.82 3.85 3.67 3.67

Information regarding weather

conditions/forecasts for specific route 3.45 3.53 3.48 3.44 3.37

E-call compatibility 3.00 3.20 3.37 2.75 3.00

Information on closest medical services (POIs) 3.40 3.32 3.32 3.00 3.15


Page | 90


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

4 OPTIMUM Platform User Requirements This Chapter relates to the determination of user requirements strongly related with results

obtained by the survey, as illustrated in Chapter 3. To determine the user requirements, the

analysis is undertaken per pilot case and pilot area.

4.1 Evaluation of Potential User Requirements Strongly related to the questionnaire format, the potential user requirements are formulated.

At the relevant questionnaire sections, each respondent answer is connected with a potential

requirement. The analysis of results per potential requirements leads to the determination of

user requirements. Exception is the Pilot Case 2, where the analysis of questionnaire results is

qualitative due to the nature of the questionnaire and the small sample.


Efficiency

In Pilot Case 1, two (2) questionnaire sections are considered essential for the determination of

user requirements, (a) User requirements for Intelligent Transportation System (Section C) and

(b) Transport Mode Shift (Section B).

As pre-mentioned, each questionnaire field is corresponding to a potential user requirement.

To determine user requirements, an evaluation of results is undertaken based on questionnaire

responds by providing the rating scale: “Low”, “Medium”, and “High”. The evaluation criteria

for adopting this scale are based on the analysis of the responds results, as follows:

Table 24: Evaluation Criteria for Determination of User Requirements – Pilot Case 110

Question No

Question Low Medium High

Q8 What would encourage you to consider

increasing the use of Public Transport? 0%-25% 25%-40% 40%-100%


increasing the use of car-sharing? 0%-25% 25%-40% 40%-100%


increasing the use of bicycle? 0%-25% 25%-40% 40%-100%


increasing the use of walking? 0%-25% 25%-40% 40%-100%

Q12 Please rate the type of content you consider

useful for conducting trips: 1.00-3.00 3.00-3.75 3.75-5.00

10

Cut-out points of each class of the table (low, medium, high) were decided based on the variance of all

observations


Page | 91


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Question No


Q13 Please choose in which trip stage the travel

information would be useful: 0%-25% 25%-40% 40%-100%

Q14

Please choose the most preferable

communication channel for each type of

data:

0%-25% 25%-40% 40%-100%

Q15 What type of mobile device do you currently

use? 0%-10% 10%-30% 40%-100%

Q16 Do you currently use smart watches? 0%-10% 10%-30% 40%-100%

The potential user requirements evaluated as “Medium” or “High” are the basis for the

determination of user requirements, presented in section 4.2.

Table 25,

Table 26 and Table 27 illustrate the evaluation of potential requirements for the pilot sites of

Birmingham, Vienna and Ljubljana respectively. The following main observations are drawn for

all pilot areas:

o The dissemination of travel times per transport mode, the real-time data for public

transport arrivals at stops/ stations and the multi-modal navigation service minimizing

overall transport time are considered very important.

o Long-term (more than 1 hour) and short-term (less than 1hour) planning of trips is

considered for the majority of content type. Consequently, it appears that short-term

and long-term forecasts are crucial for the system.

o On-trip traveller information is considered essential for the provision of travel times per

transport mode, traffic incidents, scheduled traffic events and parking guidance

information regarding parking space availability.

o In regards to the significance of travellers communication channels, web-site and mobile

applications are evaluated very high for the majority of data content. This shows that

the OPTIMUM platform scope is coherent to user requirements. On the other hand,

social media as a useful traveller’s communication channel does not score very high.

Besides, radio services are considered quite significant for the deployment of traffic

incidents and events.


Page | 92


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Table 25: Evaluation of Potential User Requirements – Pilot Case 1 - Birmingham, U.K.

Lon

g-Te

rm

Sho

rt-T

erm

On

-Tri

p

Po

st-T

rip

We

b-S

ite

Mo

bile

Ap

p

Smar

t O

BU

VM

S Si

gns

Smar

t B

us

Sto

ps

LED

in v

eh

icle

SMS

on

de

man

d

Rad

io

Soci

al M

ed

ia

An

dro

id

iPh

on

e

Win

do

ws

1Provision of estimated travel times per transport mode between each

trip pair4,11 High High High Medium Low High High Medium Low High Medium Low Low Low

2Provision of routing service per transport mode between each trip

pair3,77 High High Medium Medium Low High High Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low

3 Provision real-time data for PT arrivals at PT stops/ stations 3,99 High Medium High High Low High Medium Low Low High Medium Low Low Low

4Multi-modal navigation service minimizing overall transport time

between each trip pair3,77 High High Medium Low Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

5 Environmental multi-modal navigation service between each trip pair 2,88 Low High Low Low Low High Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

6Parking guidance service related to parking space availability (on-

street/ off-street)3,44 Medium Medium Medium High Low High Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

7 Provision of service for real-time car-sharing/ car-pooling demand 1,77 Low Medium Low Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

8 Provision of traffic conditions on the road network 3,92 High High High High Low High High Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low

9 Provision of traffic events on the road network 3,85 High High Medium Medium Low High High Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low

10 Provision of traffic incidents on the road network 3,84 High High High High Low High High Low Medium Low Low Low Medium Low

11 Dissemination of information for park&ride locations 2,90 Low High Medium Low Low High Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

12 Dissemination of information for public transport interchange hubs 3,21 Medium High Medium Low Low High Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

13 Dissemination of information for dedicated car pooling sites 1,86 Low Medium Low Low Low High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

14Dissemination of information related to dedicated public transport

network2,50 Low Medium Low Low Low High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

15Dissemination of information for dedicated HOV lanes upon the road

network2,15 Low Medium Low Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

16Dissemination of information regarding dedicated cycling network

(e.g. cycle routes, stations)2,57 Low High Low Low Low High Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

17 Provision of weather information 3,06 Medium High High Medium Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

18 Provision of road pricing information 2,45 Low High Medium Low Low High Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

19 Provision of parking pricing information 3,15 Medium High Medium Medium Low High Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

20 Provision of public transport ticketing information 3,77 High High Medium Low Low High Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

PriorityData Typea/a

Rating

Scale

(1 to 5)

Smar

t W

atch

Use

Low

Phones use

High High Low

Stage of Travel Info Provision Communication Channels


Page | 93


Version 1.0, 29/02/2016

Table 26: Evaluation of Potential User Requirements – Pilot Case 1 - Vienna, Austria

Lon

g-Te

rm

Sho

rt-T

erm

On

-Tri

p

Po

st-T

rip

We

b-S

ite

Mo

bile

Ap

p

Smar

t O

BU

VM

S Si

gns

Smar

t B

us

Sto

ps

LED

in v

eh

icle

SMS

on

de

man

d

Rad

io

Soci

al M

ed

ia

An

dro

id

iPh

on

e

Win

do

ws


trip pair4,40 High High High High Low High High Medium Low Medium Medium Low Low Low

2 Provision of routing service per transport mode between each trip pair 3,72 Medium High High High Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

3 Provision real-time data for PT arrivals at PT stops/ stations 4,03 High Low High High Low Medium High Low Low High Medium Low Low Low


between each trip pair3,98 High High High High Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

5 Environmental multi-modal navigation service between each trip pair 2,90 Low High High Medium Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low


street/ off-street)2,70 Low Low High High Low Medium High Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low

7 Provision of service for real-time car-sharing/ car-pooling demand 2,15 Low Medium High Low Low Medium High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

8 Provision of traffic conditions on the road network 3,48 Medium Low High High Low Medium High High Medium Low Low Low Medium Low

9 Provision of traffic events on the road network 3,45 Medium Medium High High Low High High High Low Low Low Low Low Low

10 Provision of traffic incidents on the road network 3,65 Medium Low High High Low Medium High High Medium Low Low Low Medium Low

11 Dissemination of information for park&ride locations 2,35 Low High High Medium Low High High Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low

12 Dissemination of information for public transport interchange hubs 3,32 Medium High High Medium Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

13 Dissemination of information for dedicated car pooling sites 2,34 Low High High Low Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low


network2,48 Low Medium High Medium Low Medium High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low


network2,13 Low Low Medium Medium Low Medium Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

16Dissemination of information regarding dedicated cycling network (e.g.

cycle routes, stations)3,42 Medium High High High Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

17 Provision of weather information 2,80 Low High High Medium Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

18 Provision of road pricing information 2,34 Low High Medium Low Low High High Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low

19 Provision of parking pricing information 2,63 Low High High Medium Low High High Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low

20 Provision of public transport ticketing information 3,11 Medium High High Medium Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low


Rating

Scale

(1 to 5)

Smar

t W

atch

Use

Low

Phones use

High Medium Low



Page | 94


Version 1.0, 29/02/2016

Table 27: Evaluation of Potential User Requirements – Pilot Case 1 - Slovenia, Ljubljana

Lon

g-Te

rm

Sho

rt-T

erm

On

-Tri

p

Po

st-T

rip

We

b-S

ite

Mo

bile

Ap

p

Smar

t O

BU

VM

S Si

gns

Smar

t B

us

Sto

ps

LED

in v

eh

icle

SMS

on

de

man

d

Rad

io

Soci

al M

ed

ia

An

dro

id

iPh

on

e

Win

do

ws


trip pair4,53 High High Medium Medium Low High High Low Low High Medium Low Low Low

2Provision of routing service per transport mode between each trip

pair4,06 High High Medium Medium Low High High Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low

3 Provision real-time data for PT arrivals at PT stops/ stations 4,55 High Medium High Medium Low High High Low Low High Medium Low Low Low


between each trip pair4,39 High High Medium High Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

5 Environmental multi-modal navigation service between each trip pair 3,33 Medium High Low Medium Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low


street/ off-street)3,72 Medium Low Medium High Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

7 Provision of service for real-time car-sharing/ car-pooling demand 3,00 Medium High Medium Low Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

8 Provision of traffic conditions on the road network 3,78 High Medium High High Low High High Low Low Low Low Low High Low

9 Provision of traffic events on the road network 3,78 High High Medium High Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Medium Low

10 Provision of traffic incidents on the road network 3,72 Medium Low High High Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Medium Low

11 Dissemination of information for park&ride locations 3,50 Medium High High High Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

12 Dissemination of information for public transport interchange hubs 3,61 Medium High High High Low High High Low Low Medium Medium Low Low Low

13 Dissemination of information for dedicated car pooling sites 2,78 Low High Medium Medium Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low


network3,33 Medium High High Medium Low High High Low Low High Medium Low Low Low


network2,95 Low High High High Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

16Dissemination of information regarding dedicated cycling network

(e.g. cycle routes, stations)3,55 Medium High High High Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

17 Provision of weather information 3,56 Medium High High High Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Medium Low

18 Provision of road pricing information 2,78 Low High Medium Medium Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

19 Provision of parking pricing information 3,11 Medium High High High Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

20 Provision of public transport ticketing information 3,28 Medium High High Medium Low High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

Smar

t W

atch

Use

Low

Phones use

High Medium Low



Rating

Scale (1

to 5)


Page | 95


Version 1.1, 29/03/2017

o The provision of real-time travel times for public transport arrivals at stops/ stations via

LED signs are considered very important by the users. Interestingly, the provision of

traffic conditions/ events and incidents via Variable Message Signs are evaluated with

“Low” score.

o As probably it would be expected, Android and iPhone are the main mobile platforms

which are currently owned by users.

Interestingly, among the three pilot areas of pilot case 1 some differences are obtained. As a

statistic, about 12%-14% of potential user requirements between the pilot areas present some

significant differences. Some differences between the pilot areas are summarized below:

o Information regarding dedicated cycling network is evaluated as “Medium” in Vienna

and Ljubljana, and as “Low” in Birmingham.

o Parking guidance information is evaluated as “Medium” in Birmingham and Ljubljana,

while scores “Low” in Vienna.

o In Birmingham and Ljubljana, the provision of information for pre-trip planning seems to

be more essential than Vienna. On the other hand, the on-trip information seems to be

more essential in Vienna and Ljubljana than Birmingham.

o The provision of information with smart on-board units within vehicle for traffic

conditions, traffic incidents and events are considered very essential in Vienna, since the

evaluation score is “High”. In contrast, the provision of the same information with the

same communication channel scores “Low” in Birmingham and Ljubljana.

o The provision of car-sharing/ car-pooling demand via mobile and web-site application is

considered important in Vienna and Ljubljana, in contradiction to Birmingham results.

For the three (3) pilot areas, the users perceived factors that OPTIMUM platform should take

into account in order to promote modal-shift are shown in Table 28. Among the three pilot

areas, the following factors appear to be very important by the users:

o Provision of service towards the improvement of public transport reliability.

o Provision of travel options, other than car, minimizing the overall transport time.

o Dissemination of information for cycle paths in good conditions.

o Dissemination of information for safe and secure cycle parking.

o Provision of weather information for promotion of cycling.

o Dissemination of information regarding dedicated cycling paths/ lanes.

On the other hand contradictory results are observed in the following cases:

o Dissemination of information related to dedicated public transport network is

considered as an important factor in Ljubljana.

o Provision of fuel cost savings for car-sharing travel is considered as an important factor

in Ljubljana.


Page | 96


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

Table 28: User’ Perception for Factors promoting Modal-Shift per Pilot Area

a/a Users’ Perception Factors for Modal-Shift

Promotion

Pilot Area

Birmingham Vienna Ljubljana

1 Provision of service towards the improvement of

public transport reliability High High High

2 Provision of travel options, other than car,

minimizing the overall transport time High High High

3 Dissemination of detailed information regarding

public transport ticketing policy High Medium Medium

4 Dissemination of detailed information for multi-

modal hubs and relevant transport connections Medium Medium High

5 Provision of service(s) related to public transport

safety and security of travellers Medium Low Low

6 Provision of personalized service in order to provide

the option for PT travel with other commuters Low Low Low

7 Dissemination of information regarding public

transport accessibility infrastructure for disabled Low Low Low

8 Provision of parking space availability and other

parking information close to public transport stations Low Low Medium

9 Dissemination of information related to dedicated

public transport network Low Low High

10 Dissemination of information related to park & ride

facilities Low Low Low

11 Dissemination of environmental related information

for each transport mode and savings by PT use Low Medium Medium

12 Provision of personalized service to find commuters

for car sharing Medium Low High

13 Provision of fuel cost savings for car-sharing travel Low Low High

14 Dissemination of information for dedicated car

pooling sites Low Medium High

15 Dissemination of parking pricing policy Low Low Medium

16

Provision of personalized service related to potential

co-travellers personal information and friendship

status

Medium Low High

17 Dissemination of information for dedicated HOV

lanes upon the road network Low Low Low


regarding savings by car-sharing travel Low Low Medium

19 Dissemination of information regarding areas not

served adequately by Public Transport Low Medium Medium

20 Provision of information related to rewarding

incentives for car-sharing travel Low Low Low


Page | 97


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017

a/a Users’ Perception Factors for Modal-Shift

Promotion

Pilot Area

Birmingham Vienna Ljubljana

21 Dissemination of information for cycle paths in good

conditions Medium High High

22 Dissemination of information for safe and secure

cycle parking Medium High High

23 Advice for safer cycling Low Low Low

24 Provision of information related to the availability of

bike sharing scheme Low Low Medium

25 Provision of service for cycling navigation and route

information Low Low Low

26 Provision of weather information for promotion of

cycling Medium High High

27 Dissemination of information regarding dedicated

cycling paths/ lanes High High High


regarding savings by cycling use Low Low Low

29 Dissemination of information for footpaths in good

conditions High Low High

30 Dissemination of information for crossing facilities Medium Medium Low

31 Provision of personalized service in order to provide

option for walking with company Low Low Medium

32 Dissemination of walking route information Low Low Low

33 Provision of weather information for promotion of

walk High High High

34 Dissemination of information regarding pedestrian

facilities for disabled Low Low Low

35 Dissemination of information related to safe and

secure streets Medium Medium High

36 Provision of service for minimizing pedestrian

distance between a trip pair Low High Medium


regarding savings by walking option Low Low Medium

o Dissemination of information for footpaths in good conditions is considered important

in Birmingham and in Ljubljana, while the scoring in Vienna is “Low”.

o Provision of service for minimizing pedestrian distance between a trip pair is considered

important in Vienna and Ljubljana, while the scoring in Birmingham is “Low”.


Page | 98


Version 1.1, 22/03/2017


The user requirements for Pilot Case 2 for OPTIMUM platform are presented in Section 4.2.

Since, the nature of the survey and the sample was low; the determination of user

requirements is based on the empirical evaluation of stakeholders’ view. So, the step of

formulation of potential user requirements is skipped for Pilot Case 2.

4.1.3 Pilot Case 3: “Integrated Car2x Communication Platform”

In Pilot Case 3, two (2) questionnaire sections are taken into account for the determination of

user requirements, (a) User requirements for Intelligent Transportation System (Section C) and

(b) Sustainable and Safe Transport (Section B).

As pre-mentioned, each questionnaire field is corresponding to a potential user requirement.

To determine user requirements, an evaluation of results is undertaken based on questionnaire

responds by providing the rating scale: “Low”, “Medium”, and “High”. The evaluation criteria

for adopting this scale are based on the analysis of the responds results, as shown in Table 29.

Moreover, the evaluation of potential user requirements for Pilot Case 3 is illustrated in Table

30.

Table 29: Evaluation Criteria for Determination of User Requirements – Pilot Case 3

Question No


Q6 Would you consider using smart driving

advice in order to reduce fuel consumption? 0%-25% 25%-40% 40%-100%

Q7 Would you consider using smart driving

advice in order to reduce CO2 emissions? 0%-25% 25%-40% 40%-100%

Q8

Would you consider getting information on

safety related matters in order to adjust your

driving behavior?

0%-25% 25%-40% 40%-100%

Q10

Please rate the type of content you consider

useful in order to control fuel consumption

and CO2 emissions:

1.00-3.00 3.00-3.60 3.60-5.00

Q11 Please rate the type of data you consider

useful per transport function: 1.00-3.00 3.00-3.60 3.60-5.00

Q12 Please rate in which trip stage the travel info

would be useful: 1.00-3.00 3.00-3.60 3.60-5.00

Q13 Please rate which communication channels

would be useful: 1.00-3.00 3.00-3.60 3.60-5.00

Q14 Please rate the specified factors which could

determine the use of TIS: 1.00-3.00 3.00-3.60 3.60-5.00


Page | 99


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

Table 30: Evaluation of Potential User Requirements – Pilot Case 3 - Ljubljana, Slovenia

Fue

l

Co

nsu

mp

tio

n

CO

2

Em

issi

on

s

Fue

l

Co

nsu

mp

tio

n

CO

2

Em

issi

on

s

Pre

-Tri

p

On

-Tri

p

Po

st-T

rip

Stat

ic

Re

al-t

ime

(<1

0m

ins)

Fore

cast

s (<

30

min

s)

Stat

ic

Re

al-t

ime

(<1

0m

ins)

Fore

cast

s (<

30

min

s)

We

b-s

ite

s

Re

spo

nsi

ve M

ob

ile

Site

Nat

ive

Mo

bile

Ap

plic

atio

n

SMS

serv

ice

on

de

man

d

Smar

t O

n B

oar

d

Un

it

Var

iab

le M

ess

age

Sign

s

Soci

al M

ed

ia (

e.g

.

Twit

ter)

Pre

ss

Acc

ess

to

TIS

(co

mm

un

icat

ion

chan

ne

ls)

Dat

a R

elia

bili

ty

Dat

a A

ccu

rate

ne

ss

Dat

a R

efr

esh

/ D

ata

Up

dat

ing

Rat

e

Val

idit

y

1 Route Trace Profiling High Low High High Low High Low Low Medium Medium Medium High High High Low High Low Low Low High High High High High

2 Social Media as data source Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium

3 Shortest travel time navigation High High High High Low High Low Medium Medium High Medium MediumMedium High Low High Low Low Low High High High High Medium

4 Environmental friendly navigation Medium High Medium Medium Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Medium Low Medium Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium

5

Parking guidance information in city areas related

to parking lotsHigh Medium Medium High Low Medium Medium Medium Medium High Medium Low MediumMedium Low Medium Low Low Low Medium High High High High

6 Parking guidance information along highwaysMedium Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Medium Low Low MediumMedium Low Medium Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium

7 Parking reservation service on highways Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Medium Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

8 Traffic conditions information High High Medium High Low Medium Medium Medium High High High Low Medium High Low High Low Low Low High High High High High

9 Traffic incidents information High Medium Medium High Low Medium Medium Medium High High High Low Medium High Low High Low Low Low High High High High High

10 Weather conditions information at specific routesMedium Medium Medium High Low Medium Medium Medium Medium High High MediumMediumMedium Low Medium Low Low Low High High High High High

11 Car maintenance data Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Medium Low Medium Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Low Medium

12 Close gas station locations Medium Low Low High Low Medium Low Low Medium Medium Low Low Low Medium Low Medium Low Low Low High High Medium Medium Medium

13 Road assistance services information Low Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Medium Low Medium Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium

14 Sudden change on average speed High Medium Low Medium Low Low Low Low Medium High Medium Low Low Low Low High Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium

15 Information on accidents black spots Medium Low Low Medium Low Medium Medium Low Low Medium Medium MediumMediumMedium Low High Low Low Low High Medium High Medium Medium

16 Traffic conditions information High High Medium High Low Medium Medium Medium High High High MediumMedium High Low High Medium Low Low High High High High High

17 Traffic incidents information High Medium Medium High Low Medium Medium Medium Medium High High Low Medium High Low High Medium Low Low High High High High High

18 Weather conditions information at specific routesMedium Medium Medium High Low Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium MediumMediumMedium Low Medium Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium

19 E-call compatibility Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Medium Low Low Low Medium Low Medium Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Low Medium

20 Closest medical services information (other POIs)Medium Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Low Low Medium Low High Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium

Factors affecting ITS usePre-trip On-trip

Sustainability

Stage of Travel Info

ProvisionUsability for:

Po

ten

tial

Use

of

safe

ty

info

to

ad

just

dri

vin

g

be

hav

ior

Safety & Security

Data Typea/a

Potential Use of

Smart Drive device Data Origin per travel info stage

Communication Channels

High

N/AHigh

-

High

N/A


Page | 100


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

The users seem to be interested for provision of services primarily focused on controlling the

fuel consumption and secondly in reduction of CO2 emissions. The services provided should be

primarily focused on-trip travelers’ support and the data origin, as it would be expected, to be

real-time. Short-term forecasts are also considered of high use. The main travelers’

communication channels are considered the Smart on board units and the mobile applications.

In respect to sustainability, the data content of high interest are the shortest travel time, the

traffic conditions and traffic incidents information. In respect to travelers’ safety and security,

the data content of high interest is the sudden change on average speed, the traffic conditions

and the traffic incidents.

4.2 Determination of User Requirements Based on the evaluation of potential requirements presented in section 4.1, the user

requirements for OPTIMUM platform are determined. User requirements evaluated as

“Medium” or “High” are considered important in order to be taken into account to the platform

design.

Separate user requirements are obtained per pilot cases. For each pilot case, a unique ID is

defined as “UR.PCx.XX”, where x: the number of pilot site and xx: the serial number of user

requirement.

The user requirements are classified into relevant OPTIMUM service and OPTIMUM domain

category. A user requirement may lie in more than one OPTIMUM service or/and OPTIMUM

domain category.

The various OPTIMUM services include:

o Navigation.

o Tracking.

o (Re-) Routing.

o Proactive Information.

o Charging and Crediting.

The various OPTIMUM domain categories include:

o Usability.

o Safety & security.

o Legal-Policy.

o Sustainability.

o Economic.


Page | 101


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

The various OPTIMUM User Profiles include:

o Passenger

o Driver

o Cyclist

o Pedestrian

o Impaired mobility

In the following sections, the OPTIMUM platform user requirements are presented.


Efficiency

The OPTIMUM Platform requirements of all pilot sites are shown in Table 31. The table

illustrates for each user requirement the priority as obtained by the users of the pilot sites, the

relevant pilot site, the user profile, the potential OPTIMUM service, the domain OPTIMUM

domain and the relevant pilot site.

Moreover, Appendix IV shows the user requirements per potential OPTIMUM service.

Table 31: OPTIMUM Platform User Requirements – Pilot Case 1

ReqID Description of User

Requirement Priority User Profile

Potential OPTIMUM service

OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

UR.PC1.01

The platform should provide services towards the improvement of public transport reliability

High Passenger - Sustainability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.02

The platform should promote all travel options, other than car, minimizing the overall transport time

High - Driver - Passenger

- Tracking - Proactive Information

Sustainability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.03

The platform should provide detailed information regarding public transport ticketing policy

Medium to High

Passenger Proactive Information - Legal-Policy - Sustainability

Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.04

The platform should provide detailed information for multi-modal hubs and relevant transport connections

Medium to High

- Driver - Passenger

Proactive Information Sustainability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.05

The platform should provide service(s) related to public transport safety and security of travellers

Medium Passenger - Tracking - Proactive Information

Safety&security Birmingham - UK

UR.PC1.06

The platform should provide information of parking space availability and other parking information close to public transport stations

Medium - Driver - Passenger

- Proactive Information - (Re-) Routing

Sustainability Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS


Page | 102


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017




OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

UR.PC1.07

The platform should provide information related to dedicated public transport network


Proactive Information Sustainability Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.08

The platform should promote environmental related information for each transport mode and savings by PT use


Proactive Information Sustainability Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.09

The platform should provide personalized service to find commuters for car sharing

Medium to High


- Tracking - Proactive Information - Navigation

- Sustainability - Economic

Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.10 The platform should provide fuel cost savings for car-sharing travel


Proactive Information Economic Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.11

The platform should provide information for dedicated car pooling sites

Medium to High


Proactive Information - Sustainability - Economic

Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.12 The platform should promote parking pricing policy


Proactive Information - Legal-Policy - Economy

Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.13

The platform should provide personalized service related to potential co-travellers personal information and friendship status

Medium to High

Passenger - Tracking - Proactive Information

Sustainability Birmingham - UK Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.14

The platform should promote environmental related information regarding savings by car-sharing travel

Medium Driver Proactive Information Sustainability Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.15

The platform should provide information regarding areas not served adequately by Public Transport

Medium Passenger Proactive Information Usability Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.16

The platform should provide information for cycle paths in good conditions

Medium to High

Cyclist - Tracking - (Re-) Routing


UR.PC1.17

The platform should provide information for safe and secure cycle parking

Medium to High

Cyclist - Tracking - (Re-) Routing

Safety&security Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.18

The platform should provide information related to the availability of bike sharing scheme

Medium Cyclist Proactive Information Sustainability Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.19

The platform should provide weather information for promoting cycling

Medium to High

Cyclist Proactive Information -Safety&security - Sustainability


UR.PC1.20

The platform should provide information regarding dedicated cycling paths/ lanes

High Cyclist Proactive Information Sustainability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS


Page | 103


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017




OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

UR.PC1.21

The platform should provide information for footpaths in good conditions

High Pedestrian - Tracking - Proactive Information

Sustainability Birmingham - UK Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.22 The platform should provide information for crossing facilities

Medium Pedestrian - Tracking - Proactive Information

Sustainability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria

UR.PC1.23

The platform should provide personalized service in order to provide option for walking with company

Medium Pedestrian - Tracking - Proactive Information

- Sustainability -Safety&Security


UR.PC1.24

The platform should provide weather information for promoting walk

High Pedestrian - Tracking - Proactive Information


UR.PC1.25

The platform should provide information related to safe and secure streets

Medium - Pedestrian - Impaired mobility


Safety&security Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria

UR.PC1.26

The platform should provide service for minimizing pedestrian distance between a trip pair

Medium to High

Pedestrian Navigation Sustainability Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.27

The platform should promote environmental related information regarding savings by walking option

Medium - Pedestrian - Driver - Passenger

Proactive Information Sustainability Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.28

The platform should provide estimated travel times per transport mode between each trip pair


Navigation - Usability - Sustainability


UR.PC1.29

The platform should provide routing service per transport mode between each trip pair

Medium to High


- Navigation - (Re-) Routing

- Usability - Sustainability


UR.PC1.30

The platform should disseminate real-time data for PT arrivals at PT stops/ stations

High Passenger Proactive Information Usability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.31

The platform should incorporate multi-modal navigation service minimizing overall transport time between each trip pair


- Navigation - Proactive Information



UR.PC1.32

The platform should incorporate environmental multi-modal navigation service between each trip pair





UR.PC1.33

The platform should incorporate parking guidance service related to parking space availability (on-street/ off-street)

Medium Driver - Proactive Information - (Re-) Routing


Birmingham - UK Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS


Page | 104


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017




OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

UR.PC1.34

The platform should provide service for real-time car-sharing/ car-pooling demand





UR.PC1.35 The platform should provide traffic conditions on the road network

Medium to High





UR.PC1.36 The platform should provide traffic events on the road network

Medium to High

Driver - Proactive Information - (Re-) Routing

- Usability - Safety&Security


UR.PC1.37 The platform should provide traffic incidents on the road network

Medium to High




UR.PC1.38 The platform should disseminate information for park&ride locations


Proactive Information Usability Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.39

The platform should disseminate information for public transport interchange hubs

Medium Passenger Proactive Information Usability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.40

The platform should disseminate information related to dedicated public transport network

Medium Passenger Proactive Information Usability Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.41

The platform should disseminate information regarding dedicated cycling network (e.g. cycle routes, stations)

Medium Cyclist Proactive Information Usability Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.42 The platform should provide weather information





UR.PC1.44 The platform should provide parking pricing information


Proactive Information - Usability - Economic


UR.PC1.45 The platform should provide public transport ticketing information

High Passenger Proactive Information - Usability - Economic


UR.PC1.46

The platform should provide long-term forecasts (higher than 1hr) of travel times per transport mode between each trip pair


- Proactive Information - Navigation

Usability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.47

The platform should provide short-term (less or equal to 1 hour) forecasts of travel times per transport mode between each trip pair

Medium to High




UR.PC1.48

The platform should provide real-time travel times data per transport mode between each trip pair

Medium to High





Page | 105


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017




OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

UR.PC1.49

The platform should incorporate trip routing service per transport mode based on long-term forecasts




UR.PC1.50

The platform should incorporate trip routing service per transport mode based on short-term forecasts

Medium to High




UR.PC1.51

The platform should incorporate trip routing service per transport mode based on real-time data

Medium to High




UR.PC1.52

The platform should provide PT arrivals at PT stops/ stations based on long-term forecasts

Medium Passenger Proactive Information Usability Birmingham - UK Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.53

The platform should provide PT arrivals at PT stops/ stations based on short-term forecasts


UR.PC1.54

The platform should provide PT arrivals at PT stops/ stations based on real-time data

Medium to High

Passenger Proactive Information Usability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.55

The platform should incorporate multi-modal navigation service minimizing overall trip transport time based on long-term forecasts




UR.PC1.56

The platform should incorporate multi-modal navigation service minimizing overall trip transport time based on short-term forecasts

Medium to High




UR.PC1.57

The platform should incorporate multi-modal navigation service minimizing overall trip transport time based on real-time data



Usability Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.58

The platform should incorporate environmental multi-modal trip navigation service based on long-term forecasts




UR.PC1.59

The platform should incorporate environmental multi-modal trip navigation service based on short-term forecasts



Usability Vienna - Austria

UR.PC1.60 The platform should incorporate environmental multi-





Page | 106


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017




OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

modal trip navigation service based on real-time data

UR.PC1.61

The platform should incorporate parking guidance service for parking space availability (on-street/ off-street) based on long-term forecasts


Usability Birmingham - UK

UR.PC1.62

The platform should incorporate parking guidance service for parking space availability (on-street/ off-street) based on short-term forecasts

Medium to High



UR.PC1.63

The platform should incorporate parking guidance service for parking space availability (on-street/ off-street) based on real-time data

High Driver - Proactive Information - (Re-) Routing


UR.PC1.64

The platform should incorporate service for dynamic car-sharing/ car-pooling demand more than one hour before the trip

Medium to High


Proactive Information Usability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.65

The platform should incorporate service for dynamic car-sharing/ car-pooling demand less than one hour before the trip

Medium to High


Proactive Information Usability Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.66 The platform should disseminate the long-term traffic conditions

Medium to High



Usability Birmingham - UK Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.67 The platform should disseminate the short-term traffic conditions




UR.PC1.68 The platform should disseminate real-time traffic conditions




UR.PC1.69 The platform should provide the long-term traffic events

Medium to High



UR.PC1.70 The platform should provide the short-term traffic events

Medium to High



UR.PC1.71 The platform should provide the real-time traffic events

Medium to High



UR.PC1.72 The platform should provide the long-term traffic incidents




Page | 107


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017




OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

UR.PC1.73 The platform should provide the short-term traffic incidents



UR.PC1.74 The platform should provide the real-time traffic incidents



UR.PC1.75

The platform should make available park&ride locations more than 1 hour before the trip



UR.PC1.76

The platform should make available park&ride locations less than 1 hour before the trip

Medium to High



UR.PC1.77

The platform should make available park&ride locations during the trip

Medium to High



UR.PC1.78

The platform should make available information for public transport interchange hubs more than 1 hour before the trip



UR.PC1.79

The platform should make available information for public transport interchange hubs less than 1 hour before the trip

Medium to High



UR.PC1.80

The platform should make available information for public transport interchange hubs during the trip

Medium to High



UR.PC1.81

The platform should make available information for dedicated car pooling sites more than 1 hour before the trip

Medium to High



UR.PC1.82

The platform should make available information for dedicated car pooling sites less than 1 hour before the trip

Medium to High



UR.PC1.83

The platform should make available information for dedicated car pooling sites during the trip



UR.PC1.84

The platform should make available information related to dedicated public transport network more




Page | 108


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017




OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

than 1 hour before the trip

UR.PC1.85

The platform should make available information related to dedicated public transport network less than 1 hour before the trip

Medium to High



UR.PC1.86

The platform should make available information related to dedicated public transport network during the trip



UR.PC1.87

The platform should make available dedicated HOV lanes more than 1 hour before the trip

Medium to High


Usability Birmingham - UK Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.88

The platform should make available dedicated HOV lanes less than 1 hour before the trip

Medium to High



UR.PC1.89 The platform should make available dedicated HOV lanes during the trip

Medium to High



UR.PC1.90

The platform should make available dedicated cycling network more than 1 hour before the trip

High Cyclist - Proactive Information - (Re-) Routing

Usability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria

UR.PC1.91

The platform should make available dedicated cycling network less than 1 hour before the trip



UR.PC1.92

The platform should make available dedicated cycling network during the trip



UR.PC1.93

The platform should provide long-term forecasts of weather conditions

High - Driver - Passenger - Cyclist


UR.PC1.94

The platform should provide short-term forecasts of weather conditions



UR.PC1.95 The platform should provide real-time weather conditions

Medium to High

- Driver - Passenger - Cyclist


UR.PC1.96

The platform should make available road pricing information more than 1 hour before the trip

High Driver Proactive Information Usability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS


Page | 109


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017




OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

UR.PC1.97

The platform should make available road pricing information less than 1 hour before the trip

Medium Driver Proactive Information Usability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.98

The platform should make available road pricing information during the trip

Medium Driver Proactive Information Usability Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.99

The platform should make available parking pricing information more than 1 hour before the trip


UR.PC1.100

The platform should make available parking pricing information less than 1 hour before the trip

Medium to High

Driver Proactive Information Usability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.101

The platform should make available parking pricing information during the trip

Medium to High


UR.PC1.102

The platform should make available public transport pricing information more than 1 hour before the trip


UR.PC1.103

The platform should make available public transport pricing information less than 1 hour before the trip


UR.PC1.104

The platform should make available public transport pricing information during the trip

Medium Passenger Proactive Information Usability Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.105

The platform should disseminate travel times per transport mode by web-site application


Navigation Usability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.106

The platform should disseminate travel times per transport mode by mobile application



UR.PC1.107

The platform should disseminate travel times information per transport mode by smart on board unit


Navigation Usability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria

UR.PC1.108

The platform should disseminate travel times for PT by electronic displays at PT stops

Medium to High



UR.PC1.109

The platform should disseminate travel times for PT by electronic displays within PT vehicle




Page | 110


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017




OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

UR.PC1.110

The platform should provide routing information per transport mode via website application



UR.PC1.111

The platform should provide routing information per transport mode via mobile application



UR.PC1.112

The platform should provide routing information for PT via Electronic Displays at PT stops


Navigation Usability Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.113

The platform should present public transport arrivals at stops/stations via web-site application

Medium to High


UR.PC1.114

The platform should present public transport arrivals at stops/stations via mobile application

Medium to High


UR.PC1.115

The platform should present public transport arrivals at stops/stations via Electronic Displays at PT stops


UR.PC1.116

The platform should present public transport arrivals at stops/stations via Electronic Displays within PT vehicle


UR.PC1.117

The platform should provide multi-modal navigation service minimizing overall transport time via web-site application




UR.PC1.118

The platform should provide multi-modal navigation service minimizing overall transport time via mobile application




UR.PC1.119

The platform should provide environmental multi-modal navigation service via web-site application




UR.PC1.120

The platform should provide environmental multi-modal navigation service via mobile application

Medium to High




UR.PC1.121

The platform should provide parking guidance information related to parking availability via web-site application

Medium to High




Page | 111


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017




OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

UR.PC1.122

The platform should provide parking guidance information related to parking availability via mobile application

Medium to High



UR.PC1.123

The platform should provide parking guidance information related to parking availability via smart on-board unit



UR.PC1.124

The platform should provide Car sharing/ Car pooling demand via web-site application

Medium to High




UR.PC1.125

The platform should provide Car sharing/ Car pooling demand via mobile application




UR.PC1.126

The platform should disseminate traffic conditions via web-site application

Medium to High




UR.PC1.127

The platform should disseminate traffic conditions via mobile application




UR.PC1.128

The platform should disseminate traffic conditions via smart on-board unit




UR.PC1.129

The platform should disseminate traffic conditions via Variable Message Signs installed on the road network




UR.PC1.130

The platform should disseminate traffic conditions via Radio Broadcasting

Medium to High




UR.PC1.131

The platform should disseminate traffic events via web-site application



UR.PC1.132

The platform should disseminate traffic events via mobile application



UR.PC1.133

The platform should disseminate traffic events via smart on-board unit



UR.PC1.134

The platform should disseminate traffic events via Variable Message Signs installed on the road network



UR.PC1.135

The platform should disseminate traffic events via Radio Broadcasting


Usability Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS


Page | 112


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017




OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

UR.PC1.136

The platform should disseminate traffic incidents via web-site application

Medium to High



UR.PC1.137

The platform should disseminate traffic incidents via mobile application



UR.PC1.138

The platform should disseminate traffic incidents via smart on-board unit



UR.PC1.139

The platform should disseminate traffic incidents via Variable Message Signs installed on the road network


Usability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria

UR.PC1.140

The platform should disseminate traffic incidents via Radio Broadcasting



UR.PC1.141

The platform should present Park&Ride locations via web-site application



UR.PC1.142

The platform should present Park&Ride locations via mobile application



UR.PC1.143

The platform should present Park&Ride locations via smart on-board unit


Proactive Information Usability Vienna - Austria

UR.PC1.144

The platform should present PT interchange hubs via web-site application



UR.PC1.145

The platform should present PT interchange hubs via mobile application

Medium to High



UR.PC1.146

The platform should present PT interchange hubs via Electronic Displays at The platform should present PT stops



UR.PC1.147

The platform should present PT interchange hubs via Electronic Displays within The platform should present PT vehicle



UR.PC1.148

The platform should present Car sharing/ Car pooling sites via web-site application



UR.PC1.149

The platform should present Car sharing/ Car pooling sites via mobile application




Page | 113


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017




OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

UR.PC1.150

The platform should present Bus Lanes information via web-site application

Medium to High


UR.PC1.151

The platform should present Bus Lanes information via mobile application

High Passenger Proactive Information Usability Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.152

The platform should present Bus Lanes information via Electronic Displays at PT stops

High Passenger Proactive Information Usability Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.153

The platform should present Bus Lanes information via Electronic Displays within PT vehicle

Medium Passenger Proactive Information Usability Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.154

The platform should present HOV lanes information via web-site application



UR.PC1.155

The platform should present HOV lanes information via mobile application



UR.PC1.156

The platform should present bicycling network via web-site application

High -Cyclist - Passenger


UR.PC1.157

The platform should present bicycling network via mobile application

Medium to High

-Cyclist - Passenger


UR.PC1.158

The platform should present weather conditions via web-site application



UR.PC1.159

The platform should present weather conditions via mobile application



UR.PC1.160

The platform should present weather conditions via Radio Broadcasting

Medium - Driver - Passenger - Cyclist


UR.PC1.161

The platform should provide road pricing information via web-site application


UR.PC1.162

The platform should provide road pricing information via mobile application

Medium to High


UR.PC1.163

The platform should provide road pricing information via smart on-board unit

Medium Driver Proactive Information Usability Vienna - Austria


Page | 114


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017




OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

UR.PC1.164

The platform should provide parking pricing information via web-site application



UR.PC1.165

The platform should provide parking pricing information via mobile application

Medium to High



UR.PC1.166

The platform should provide parking pricing information via smart on-board unit


Proactive Information Usability Vienna - Austria

UR.PC1.167

The platform should provide PT pricing information via web-site application


UR.PC1.168

The platform should provide PT pricing information via mobile application


UR.PC1.169 Platform should be used by Android Phones


- Usability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS

UR.PC1.170 Platform should be usable by iPhone


- Usability Birmingham - UK Vienna - Austria Ljubljana - Slovenia TIS


The OPTIMUM Platform requirements with all pilot sites are shown in Table 32. The user

requirements are obtained based on qualitative analysis of the stakeholders’ view as reflected

in the completion of the relevant questionnaires for both motorway and freight operator. For

each user requirement, it is shown:

o whether the requirement is obtained by the motorway or/and the fleet operator,

o the perceived priority is set based on Consultant’s evaluation,

o the relevant involved users are defined, as those required for data input , and those are

expected to be the end-users of the system,

o the potential OPTIMUM service is defined,

o the relevant domain category is defined.



Page | 115


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017



Requirement

Perceived Priority (L/H/M)

User Potential OPTIMUM

service

OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site Data Input End-User

UR.PC2.01

The platform should receive real-time data of typical cargo flows regarding trip origin - destination

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator

Tracking Sustainability

Portugal - Motorway & Fleet Operator

UR.PC2.02

The platform should receive real-time data of Dangerous Goods flows regarding trip origin - destination

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator



UR.PC2.03

The platform should receive real-time data of typical cargo flows regarding trip estimated length

M Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator

Tracking Sustainability Portugal - Fleet Operator

UR.PC2.04

The platform should receive real-time data of Dangerous Goods flows regarding trip estimated length

M Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.05

The platform should receive real-time data of typical cargo flows regarding the scheduled trip route

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator

Tracking Sustainability Portugal - Motorway Operator

UR.PC2.06

The platform should receive real-time data of Dangerous Goods flows regarding the scheduled trip route

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.07

The platform should receive real-time data of Dangerous Goods flows regarding trip estimated fuel consumption

M Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.08

The platform should receive real-time data of typical cargo flows regarding trip estimated fuel consumption

M Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.09

The platform should receive real-time data of Dangerous Goods flows regarding willingness to pay for scheduled route

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.10

The platform should receive real-time data of Dangerous Goods flows regarding willingness to pay for scheduled route

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.11

The platform should receive real-time data of Dangerous Goods flows regarding vehicle weigh axle load

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.12

The platform should receive real-time data of Dangerous Goods flows regarding vehicle weigh axle load

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.13

The platform should provide functionality for manual insertion of typical cargo flows regarding trip origin - destination

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator

Tracking Sustainability -


Page | 116


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017


Requirement



service

OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

Data Input End-User

UR.PC2.14

The platform should provide functionality for manual insertion of Dangerous Goods flows regarding trip origin - destination

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.15

The platform should provide functionality for manual insertion of typical cargo flows regarding trip estimated length

M Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.16

The platform should provide functionality for manual insertion of Dangerous Goods flows regarding trip estimated length

M Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.17

The platform should provide functionality for manual insertion of typical cargo flows regarding the scheduled trip route

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.18

The platform should provide functionality for manual insertion of Dangerous Goods flows regarding the scheduled trip route

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.19

The platform should provide functionality for manual insertion of Dangerous Goods flows regarding trip estimated fuel consumption

M Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.20

The platform should provide functionality for manual insertion of typical cargo flows regarding trip estimated fuel consumption

M Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.21

The platform should provide functionality for manual insertion of Dangerous Goods flows regarding willingness to pay for scheduled route

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.22

The platform should provide functionality for manual insertion of Dangerous Goods flows regarding willingness to pay for scheduled route

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.23

The platform should provide functionality for manual insertion of Dangerous Goods flows regarding vehicle weigh axle load

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.24

The platform should provide functionality for manual insertion of Dangerous Goods flows regarding vehicle weigh axle load

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.25 The platform should include the include the toll plaza locations

H Motorway Operator

- Fleet Operator - Public



Page | 117


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017


Requirement



service

OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

Data Input End-User

UR.PC2.26

The platform should provide information regarding the existing toll collection systems: (a) Electronic fee collection - 2 types: Dedicated Short Range Communication, Automatic Plate Recognition, (b) Manual, (c)Coins

H Motorway Operator

- Fleet Operator - Public


UR.PC2.27 The platform should receive real-time traffic flows from road network

H Motorway Operator

- Tracking Sustainability


UR.PC2.28 The platform should receive real-time traffic composition/ HGV flows from road network

H Motorway Operator

- Tracking Sustainability Portugal - Motorway Operator

UR.PC2.29 The platform should receive real-time traffic level of service from road network

H Motorway Operator

- Tracking Sustainability Portugal - Fleet Operator

UR.PC2.30 The platform should receive real-time travel times from road network

M Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.31 The platform should receive real-time speeds from road network

M Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.32

The platform should receive real-time traffic incidents with the following characteristics from the road network: (a) location, (b) time, (c)severity, (d) validation

H Motorway Operator



UR.PC2.33

The platform should provide functionality of traffic incidents with the following characteristics from the road network: (a) location, (b) time, (c)severity, (d) validation

H Motorway Operator

- Tracking Sustainability -

UR.PC2.34 The platform should receive environmental emissions data from the road network

M Motorway Operator


UR.PC2.35 The platform should receive weather information forecasts

M Meteo Authority


UR.PC2.36

The platform should receive scheduled events on the road network (e.g. maintenance activities, protests) with the following characteristics from the road network: (a) location, (b) time, (c)severity, (d) validation

H

- Motorway Operator - Municipalities - Ministry of Transport



UR.PC2.37

The platform should build hourly traffic profiles per type of day (weekdays Weekend, National Holidays), per day (Mon, Tue,….), per seasonal period (winter, summer)

H -

- Fleet Operator - Public (subscribed)

Proactive Information

Sustainability -


Page | 118


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017


Requirement



service

OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

Data Input End-User

UR.PC2.38

The platform should provide short-term and long term forecasts for optimal route selection according to criterion of travel time minimization (Graphic, Text) based on pertaining traffic conditions/ restrictions on the road network

M

- Motorway Operator - Fleet Operator



Sustainability Portugal - Fleet Operator

UR.PC2.39

The platform should provide short-term and long term forecasts for optimal route selection according to criterion of cost minimization (Graphic, Text)

M





UR.PC2.40

The platform should provide short-term and long term forecasts for optimal route selection according to criterion of generalized cost minimization (Graphic, Text)

M





UR.PC2.41

The platform should provide short-term and long term forecasts for optimal route selection according to criterion of minimum safety cost minimization - applicable to Dangerous Goods

M


Fleet Operator


Sustainability Portugal - Motorway Operator

UR.PC2.42

The platform should provide short-term and long term forecasts for optimal route selection according to criterion of environmental cost minimization (Graphic, Text)

M




Sustainability Portugal - Motorway Operator

UR.PC2.43

A toll estimator equation should be integrated within platform to calculate suggested toll prices based on parameters & equation set by the motorway operator, such as: (a) Total traffic flows, (b) HGV flows, (c)Level of service, (d) environmental emissions

H Motorway Operator

Fleet Operator

Charging and Crediting

- Economic - Legal-Policy


UR.PC2.44

The toll estimator equation should be configured so that the weighting of parameters and data can be manually configured

H Motorway Operator

- Charging and Crediting

Economic


UR.PC2.45

The platform should include an information module for toll estimation per toll plaza and per suggested route

H - Fleet Operator


Economic -

UR.PC2.46 The platform should include a charging mechanisme per toll collection and per route

M Motorway Operator

Fleet Operator


- Economic - Legal-Policy

-

UR.PC2.47 The platform should provide the scheduled HGV trips more than 24 hrs before for trip

H Fleet Operator

Motorway Operator

- Proactive Information - (Re-

- Economic - Sustainability

Portugal - Motorway & Fleet


Page | 119


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017


Requirement



service

OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

Data Input End-User

planning )Routing Operator

UR.PC2.48 The platform should disseminated data at least 5 hrs prior to trip conduction

H - Fleet Operator

- Proactive Information - (Re-)Routing

- Economic - Sustainability

Portugal - Fleet Operator

UR.PC2.49 The platform should be able to disseminate data to public

H - Public (subscribed)


Usability Portugal - Motorway Operator

UR.PC2.50 The platform should be able to disseminate data to enterprises

H - Fleet Operator



UR.PC2.51

The platform should be able to integrate with enterprises platforms in order to disseminate (a) dynamic cost rating per plaza and per route, (b) traffic conditions,(c)traffic incidents, (d) traffic events, (e) optimal routing with set of criteria

H - Fleet Operator


Usability


UR.PC2.52

The platform should be able to integrate with web-sites in order to disseminate (a) dynamic cost rating per plaza and per route, (b) traffic conditions,(c)traffic incidents, (d) traffic events, (e) optimal routing with set of criteria

M -



Usability


UR.PC2.53

The platform should be able to integrate with mobile devices in order to disseminate (a) dynamic cost rating per plaza and per route, (b) traffic conditions,(c)traffic incidents, (d) traffic events, (e) optimal routing with set of criteria

M -



Usability


UR.PC2.54

The platform should be able to integrate with social media in order to disseminate (a) dynamic cost rating per plaza and per route, (b) traffic conditions,(c)traffic incidents, (d) traffic events

L - Public Proactive Information

Usability Portugal - Fleet Operator

UR.PC2.55

The platform should be able to integrate with IVR in order to disseminate (a) dynamic cost rating per plaza and per route, (b) traffic conditions,(c)traffic incidents, (d) traffic events,

L -



Usability Portugal - Fleet Operator

UR.PC2.56

The platform should be able to integrate with in-vehicle smart devices in order to disseminate (a) dynamic cost rating per plaza and per route, (b) traffic conditions,(c)traffic incidents, (d) traffic events, (e) optimal

H - Fleet Operator


Usability



Page | 120


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017


Requirement



service

OPTIMUM Domain

Pilot Site

Data Input End-User

routing with set of criteria

UR.PC2.57

The platform should be able to integrate with Variable Message Signs in order to disseminate (a) dynamic cost rating per plaza and per route, (b) traffic conditions,(c)traffic incidents, (d) traffic events, (e) optimal routing with set of criteria

H - - Fleet Operator - Public

- Proactive Information - (Re-)Routing


4.2.3 Pilot Case 3: “Integrated Car2x Communication Platform”

The OPTIMUM Platform user requirements for Pilot Case 3 are shown in Table 33. The table

presents for each user requirement the priority as obtained by users, the relevant pilot site, the

user profile, the potential OPTIMUM service and the domain category.



ReqID Description of User Requirement Priority User Profile Potential OPTIMUM

service Domain Category

UR.PC3.01 The system should incorporate in-vehicle smart driving advice to reduce fuel consumption

High Driver Proactive Information Economic

UR.PC3.02 The system should incorporate in-vehicle smart driving advice to reduce CO2 emissions


Proactive Information Sustainability

UR.PC3.03 The system should provide within vehicle real-time information on safety related matters


Proactive Information Safety&security

UR.PC3.04 The system should provide route trace profile information for fuel consumption control

High Driver Navigation Economic

UR.PC3.05 The system should incorporate shortest travel time navigation service for fuel consumption control


Navigation Economic

UR.PC3.06 The system should incorporate shortest travel time navigation service for CO2 emissions control


Navigation Sustainability

UR.PC3.07 The system should incorporate environmental friendly navigation service for fuel consumption control



UR.PC3.08 The system should incorporate environmental friendly navigation service for CO2 emissions control



UR.PC3.09 The system should provide parking guidance information for parking lots availability in order to control fuel consumption

High Driver (Re-) Routing Economic

UR.PC3.10 The system should provide parking guidance information for parking lots availability in order to control CO2 emissions

Medium Driver - (Re-) Routing - Proactive Information

Sustainability


Page | 121


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017



UR.PC3.11 The system should provide parking guidance information along highways for fuel consumption control


Economic

UR.PC3.12 The system should provide traffic conditions information for fuel consumption control

High Driver - (Re-) Routing - Proactive Information

-Safety&Security - Economic

UR.PC3.13 The system should provide traffic conditions information for CO2 emissions control


-Safety&Security - Sustainability

UR.PC3.14 The system should provide traffic incidents information for fuel consumption control



UR.PC3.15 The system should provide traffic incidents information for CO2 emissions control


-Safety&Security - Sustainability

UR.PC3.16 The system should provide weather conditions information at specific routes for fuel consumption control


- (Re-) Routing - Proactive Information


UR.PC3.17 The system should provide weather conditions information at specific routes for CO2 emissions control



- Safety&Security - Sustainability

UR.PC3.18 The system should provide close gas station locations for fuel consumption control

Medium Driver Navigation Usability

UR.PC3.19 The system should provide assistance for sudden change on average speed to control fuel consumption

High Driver Proactive Information -Safety&Security - Economic

UR.PC3.20 The system should provide assistance for sudden change on average speed to control CO2 emissions

Medium Driver Proactive Information -Safety&Security - Economic

UR.PC3.21 The system should use information on accidents black spots for fuel consumption control

Medium Driver Proactive Information -Safety&Security - Economic

UR.PC3.22 The system should provide the closest medical services information to control fuel consumption


Navigation - Usability -Safety&Security

UR.PC3.23 The system should use static route trace profiles for pre-trip planning

High Driver Navigation Usability

UR.PC3.24 The system should use static shortest travel time navigation service for pre-trip planning


Navigation Usability

UR.PC3.25 The system should use forecasted shortest travel time navigation service for pre-trip planning



UR.PC3.26 The system should use static environmental friendly navigation service for pre-trip planning



UR.PC3.27 The system should provide parking guidance in city areas related to static parking lots availability for pre-trip planning


Usability

UR.PC3.28 The system should provide parking guidance in city areas related to real-time parking lots availability for pre-trip planning


Usability

UR.PC3.29 The system should provide parking guidance in city areas related to forecasted parking lots availability for pre-trip planning


Usability

UR.PC3.30 The system should use static traffic conditions for pre-trip planning



Usability


Page | 122


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017



UR.PC3.31 The system should use real-time traffic conditions for pre-trip planning



Usability

UR.PC3.32 The system should use forecasted traffic conditions for pre-trip planning



Usability

UR.PC3.33 The system should use static traffic incidents for pre-trip planning


Usability

UR.PC3.34 The system should use real-time traffic incidents for pre-trip planning


Usability

UR.PC3.35 The system should use forecasted traffic incidents for pre-trip planning


Usability

UR.PC3.36 The system should use static information regarding weather conditions for pre-trip planning



Usability

UR.PC3.37 The system should use real-time information regarding weather conditions for pre-trip planning



Usability

UR.PC3.38 The system should use forecasted information regarding weather conditions for pre-trip planning



Usability

UR.PC3.39 The system should use static information on closest gas station for pre-trip planning


UR.PC3.40 The system should use static route trace profiles during the trip


UR.PC3.41 The system should use real-time route trace profiles during the trip


UR.PC3.42 The system should use forecasted route trace profiles during the trip


UR.PC3.43 The system should use static shortest travel time navigation service during the trip



UR.PC3.44 The system should use real-time shortest travel time navigation service during the trip



UR.PC3.45 The system should use forecasted shortest travel time navigation service during the trip



UR.PC3.46 The system should provide parking guidance in city areas related to static parking lots availability during the trip


Usability

UR.PC3.47 The system should provide parking guidance in city areas related to real-time parking lots availability during the trip


Usability

UR.PC3.48 The system should provide parking guidance in city areas related to forecasted parking lots availability during the trip


Usability

UR.PC3.49 The system should provide parking guidance along highways related to real-time parking lots availability during the trip


Usability


Page | 123


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017



UR.PC3.50 The system should use static traffic conditions during the trip



Usability

UR.PC3.51 The system should use real-time traffic conditions during the trip



Usability

UR.PC3.52 The system should use forecasted traffic conditions during the trip



Usability

UR.PC3.53 The system should use static traffic incidents during the trip


Usability

UR.PC3.54 The system should use real-time traffic incidents during the trip


Usability

UR.PC3.55 The system should use forecasted traffic incidents during the trip


Usability

UR.PC3.56 The system should use static information regarding weather conditions during the trip



Usability

UR.PC3.57 The system should use real-time information regarding weather conditions during the trip



Usability

UR.PC3.58 The system should use forecasted information regarding weather conditions during the trip



Usability

UR.PC3.59 The system should use static information on closest gas station during the trip


UR.PC3.60 The system should use real-time information on closest gas station during the trip


UR.PC3.61 The system should use static information on accidents black spots for pre-trip planning

Medium Driver Proactive Information Usability

UR.PC3.62 The system should use real-time information on accidents black spots for pre-trip planning


UR.PC3.63 The system should use static traffic conditions for pre-trip planning



Usability

UR.PC3.64 The system should use real-time traffic conditions for pre-trip planning



Usability

UR.PC3.65 The system should use forecasted traffic conditions for pre-trip planning



Usability

UR.PC3.66 The system should use static traffic incidents for pre-trip planning


Usability

UR.PC3.67 The system should use real-time traffic incidents for pre-trip planning


Usability


Page | 124


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017



UR.PC3.68 The system should use forecasted traffic incidents for pre-trip planning


Usability

UR.PC3.69 The system should use static weather conditions information of specific routes for pre-trip planning



Usability

UR.PC3.70 The system should use real-time weather conditions information of specific routes for pre-trip planning



Usability

UR.PC3.71 The system should use forecasted weather conditions information of specific routes for pre-trip planning



Usability

UR.PC3.72 The system should use static sudden changes information on average speed during the trip


UR.PC3.73 The system should use real-time sudden changes information on average speed during the trip

High Driver Proactive Information Usability

UR.PC3.74 The system should use forecasted sudden changes information on average speed during the trip


UR.PC3.75 The system should use real-time information on accidents black spots during the trip


UR.PC3.76 The system should use forecasted information on accidents black spots during the trip


UR.PC3.77 The system should use static traffic conditions during the trip



Usability

UR.PC3.78 The system should use real-time traffic conditions during the trip



Usability

UR.PC3.79 The system should use forecasted traffic conditions during the trip



Usability

UR.PC3.80 The system should use static traffic incidents during the trip


Usability

UR.PC3.81 The system should use real-time traffic incidents during the trip


Usability

UR.PC3.82 The system should use forecasted traffic incidents during the trip


Usability

UR.PC3.83 The system should use static weather conditions information of specific routes during the trip



Usability

UR.PC3.84 The system should use real-time weather conditions information of specific routes during the trip



Usability

UR.PC3.85 The system should use forecasted weather conditions information of specific routes during the trip



Usability

UR.PC3.86 The system should use real-time information of e-call compatibility for trip-planning

Medium Driver - Tracking - Proactive Information

Usability


Page | 125


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017



UR.PC3.87 The system should use static information of closest medical services for trip-planning



UR.PC3.88 The system should use real-time information of closest medical services for trip-planning



UR.PC3.89 The system should use forecasted information of closest medical services for trip-planning



UR.PC3.90 The system should use route trace profile for pre-trip planning


UR.PC3.91 The system should use route trace profile during the trip


UR.PC3.92 The system should use social media as a data source for pre-trip planning


Tracking Usability

UR.PC3.93 The system should provide shortest travel time navigation for pre-trip planning



UR.PC3.94 The system should provide shortest travel time navigation during the trip



UR.PC3.95 The system should provide environmentally friendly navigation for pre-trip planning



UR.PC3.96 The system should provide environmentally friendly navigation during the trip



UR.PC3.97 The system should provide parking guidance information in city areas related to parking lots availability for pre-trip planning


Usability

UR.PC3.98 The system should provide parking guidance information in city areas related to parking lots availability during the trip


Usability

UR.PC3.99 The system should provide parking guidance information along the highways related to parking lots availability during the trip


Usability

UR.PC3.100 The system should provide traffic conditions information for pre-trip planning



Usability

UR.PC3.101 The system should provide traffic conditions information during the trip



Usability

UR.PC3.102 The system should provide traffic incidents information for pre-trip planning


Usability

UR.PC3.103 The system should provide traffic incidents information during the trip


Usability

UR.PC3.104 The system should provide weather conditions/ forecasts per specific route for pre-trip planning



Usability

UR.PC3.105 The system should provide weather conditions/ forecasts per specific route during the trip



Usability

UR.PC3.106 The system should provide on-trip information on closest gas stations


UR.PC3.107 The system should provide on-trip information on road assistance services

Medium Driver - Navigation - Proactive Information

Usability


Page | 126


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017



UR.PC3.108 The system should provide on-trip sudden changes on average speed


UR.PC3.109 The system should provide on-trip information on accident black spots


UR.PC3.110 The system should provide pre-trip information for traffic conditions



Usability

UR.PC3.111 The system should provide on-trip information for traffic conditions



Usability

UR.PC3.112 The system should provide pre-trip information for traffic incidents


Usability

UR.PC3.113 The system should provide on-trip information for traffic incidents


Usability

UR.PC3.114 The system should provide pre-trip information for weather conditions/forecasts per specific route



Usability

UR.PC3.115 The system should provide on-trip information for weather conditions/forecasts per specific route



Usability

UR.PC3.116 The system should provide pre-trip information on closest medical services



UR.PC3.117 The system should provide route trace profiling information via web-site


- (Re-) Routing Usability

UR.PC3.118 The system should provide route trace profiling information via responsive mobile site


UR.PC3.119 The system should provide route trace profiling information via native mobile application


UR.PC3.120 The system should provide route trace profiling information via Smart On-Board Unit


UR.PC3.121 The system should provide use of social media as data source for native mobile application


Tracking Usability

UR.PC3.122 The system should provide shortest travel time navigation via web-site



UR.PC3.123 The system should provide shortest travel time navigation via responsive mobile site



UR.PC3.124 The system should provide shortest travel time navigation via native mobile application



UR.PC3.125 The system should provide shortest travel time navigation via Smart On-Board Unit



UR.PC3.126 The system should provide environmental friendly navigation via native mobile application



UR.PC3.127 The system should provide disseminate environmental friendly navigation via Smart On-Board Unit



UR.PC3.128 The system should provide parking guidance information regarding parking lot availability within city areas via native mobile application


Usability


Page | 127


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017



UR.PC3.129 The system should provide parking guidance information regarding parking lot availability within city areas via responsive mobile site


Usability

UR.PC3.130 The system should provide parking guidance information regarding parking lot availability within city areas via Smart On-Board Unit


Usability

UR.PC3.131 The system should provide parking guidance information regarding parking lot availability along highways availability via native mobile application


Usability

UR.PC3.132 The system should provide parking guidance information regarding parking lot availability along highways via responsive mobile site


Usability

UR.PC3.133 The system should provide parking guidance information regarding parking lot availability along highways via Smart On-Board Unit


Usability

UR.PC3.134 The system should provide parking reservation module on highways via responsive mobile site

Medium Driver Charging and Crediting

Usability

UR.PC3.135 The system should provide disseminate parking reservation module on highways via Smart On-Board Unit

Medium Driver Charging and Crediting

Usability

UR.PC3.136 The system should disseminate traffic conditions via native mobile application



Usability

UR.PC3.137 The system should disseminate traffic conditions via responsive mobile site



Usability

UR.PC3.138 The system should disseminate traffic conditions via Smart On-Board Unit



Usability

UR.PC3.139 The system should disseminate traffic incidents via native mobile application


Usability

UR.PC3.140 The system should disseminate traffic incidents via responsive mobile site


Usability

UR.PC3.141 The system should disseminate traffic incidents via Smart On-Board Unit


Usability

UR.PC3.142 The system should disseminate information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route via web-site



Usability

UR.PC3.143 The system should disseminate information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route via native mobile application



Usability

UR.PC3.144 The system should disseminate information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route via responsive mobile site



Usability

UR.PC3.145 The system should disseminate information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route via Smart On-Board Unit



Usability


Page | 128


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017



UR.PC3.146 The system should disseminate information on car maintenance issue via responsive mobile site

Medium Driver - Tracking - Proactive information

Usability

UR.PC3.147 The system should disseminate information on car maintenance issue via Smart On-Board Unit


Usability

UR.PC3.148 The system should disseminate information on closest gas station via responsive mobile site


UR.PC3.149 The system should disseminate information on closest gas station via Smart On-Board Unit


UR.PC3.150 The system should disseminate information on road assistance services via responsive mobile site


UR.PC3.151 The system should disseminate information on road assistance services via Smart On-Board Unit


UR.PC3.152 The system should provide sudden changes on average speed via Smart On-Board Unit


UR.PC3.153 The system should provide information on accident black spots via web-site


UR.PC3.154 The system should provide information on accident black spots via native mobile application


UR.PC3.155 The system should provide information on accident black spots via responsive mobile site


UR.PC3.156 The system should provide information on accident black spots via Smart On-Board Unit


UR.PC3.157 The system should provide traffic conditions via web-site



Usability

UR.PC3.158 The system should provide traffic conditions via native mobile application



Usability

UR.PC3.159 The system should provide traffic conditions via responsive mobile site



Usability

UR.PC3.160 The system should provide traffic conditions via Smart On-Board Unit



Usability

UR.PC3.161 The system should provide traffic conditions via Variable Message Signs



Usability

UR.PC3.162 The system should provide traffic incidents via native mobile application


Usability

UR.PC3.163 The system should provide traffic incidents via responsive mobile site


Usability

UR.PC3.164 The system should provide traffic incidents via Smart On-Board Unit


Usability

UR.PC3.165 The system should provide traffic incidents via Variable Message Signs


Usability


Page | 129


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017



UR.PC3.166 The system should provide information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route via web-site



Usability

UR.PC3.167 The system should provide information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route via native mobile application



Usability

UR.PC3.168 The system should provide information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route via responsive mobile site



Usability

UR.PC3.169 The system should provide information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route via Smart On-Board Unit



Usability

UR.PC3.170 The system should provide e-Call info via responsive mobile site


Usability

UR.PC3.171 The system should provide e-Call info via Smart On-Board Unit


Usability

UR.PC3.172 The system should provide information on closest medical services (POIs) via responsive mobile site



UR.PC3.173 The system should provide information on closest medical services (POIs) via Smart On-Board Unit



UR.PC3.174 The system should ensure access to TIS for route trace profiling


UR.PC3.175 The system should ensure high data reliability for route trace profiling


UR.PC3.176 The system should ensure high data accurateness for route trace profiling


UR.PC3.177 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for route trace profiling


UR.PC3.178 The system should ensure increased validity for route trace profiling


UR.PC3.179 The system should ensure access to TIS for social media as data source



UR.PC3.180 The system should ensure high data reliability for social media as data source



UR.PC3.181 The system should ensure high data accurateness for social media as data source



UR.PC3.182 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for social media as data source



UR.PC3.183 The system should ensure increased validity for social media as data source



UR.PC3.184 The system should ensure access to TIS for shortest travel time navigation



UR.PC3.185 The system should ensure high data reliability for shortest travel time navigation



UR.PC3.186 The system should ensure high data accurateness for shortest travel time navigation



UR.PC3.187 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for shortest travel time navigation



UR.PC3.188 The system should ensure increased validity for shortest travel time navigation




Page | 130


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017



UR.PC3.189 The system should ensure access to TIS for environmental Friendly navigation



UR.PC3.190 The system should ensure high data reliability for environmental Friendly navigation



UR.PC3.191 The system should ensure high data accurateness for environmental Friendly navigation



UR.PC3.192 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for environmental Friendly navigation



UR.PC3.193 The system should ensure increased validity for environmental Friendly navigation



UR.PC3.194 The system should ensure access to TIS for parking guidance in city areas for parking space availability


Sustainability

UR.PC3.195 The system should ensure high data reliability for parking guidance in city areas for parking space availability

High Driver - Navigation - Proactive Information

Sustainability

UR.PC3.196 The system should ensure high data accurateness for parking guidance in city areas for parking space availability


Sustainability

UR.PC3.197 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for parking guidance in city areas for parking space availability


Sustainability

UR.PC3.198 The system should ensure increased validity for parking guidance in city areas for parking space availability


Sustainability

UR.PC3.199 The system should ensure access to TIS for parking guidance along the highways for parking space availability


Sustainability

UR.PC3.200 The system should ensure high data reliability for parking guidance along the highways for parking space availability


Sustainability

UR.PC3.201 The system should ensure high data accurateness for parking guidance along the highways for parking space availability


Sustainability

UR.PC3.202 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for parking guidance along the highways for parking space availability


Sustainability

UR.PC3.203 The system should ensure increased validity for parking guidance along the highways for parking space availability


Sustainability

UR.PC3.204 The system should ensure access to TIS for traffic conditions



Sustainability

UR.PC3.205 The system should ensure high data reliability for traffic conditions



Sustainability

UR.PC3.206 The system should ensure high data accurateness for traffic conditions



Sustainability

UR.PC3.207 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for traffic conditions



Sustainability


Page | 131


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017



UR.PC3.208 The system should ensure increased validity for traffic conditions



Sustainability

UR.PC3.209 The system should ensure access to TIS for traffic incidents


Sustainability

UR.PC3.210 The system should ensure high data reliability for traffic incidents


Sustainability

UR.PC3.211 The system should ensure high data accurateness for traffic incidents


Sustainability

UR.PC3.212 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for traffic incidents


Sustainability

UR.PC3.213 The system should ensure increased validity for traffic incidents


Sustainability

UR.PC3.214 The system should ensure access to TIS for information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route



Sustainability

UR.PC3.215 The system should ensure high data reliability for information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route



Sustainability

UR.PC3.216 The system should ensure high data accurateness for information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route



Sustainability

UR.PC3.217 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route



Sustainability

UR.PC3.218 The system should ensure increased validity for information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route



Sustainability

UR.PC3.219 The system should ensure access to TIS for information on car maintenance issues


Sustainability

UR.PC3.220 The system should ensure high data reliability for information on car maintenance issues


Sustainability

UR.PC3.221 The system should ensure high data accurateness for information on car maintenance issues


Sustainability

UR.PC3.222 The system should ensure increased validity for information on car maintenance issues


Sustainability

UR.PC3.223 The system should ensure access to TIS for information on closest gas station

High Driver Navigation Sustainability

UR.PC3.224 The system should ensure high data reliability for information on closest gas station

High Driver Navigation Sustainability

UR.PC3.225 The system should ensure high data accurateness for information on closest gas station

Medium Driver Navigation Sustainability


Page | 132


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017



UR.PC3.226 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for information on closest gas station


UR.PC3.227 The system should ensure increased validity for information on closest gas station


UR.PC3.228 The system should ensure access to TIS for information on road assistance services

Medium Driver Proactive Information Sustainability

UR.PC3.229 The system should ensure high data reliability for information on road assistance services


UR.PC3.230 The system should ensure high data accurateness for information on road assistance services


UR.PC3.231 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for information on road assistance services


UR.PC3.232 The system should ensure increased validity for information on road assistance services


UR.PC3.233 The system should ensure access to TIS for sudden changes on average speed


UR.PC3.234 The system should ensure high data reliability for sudden changes on average speed


UR.PC3.235 The system should ensure high data accurateness for sudden changes on average speed


UR.PC3.236 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for sudden changes on average speed


UR.PC3.237 The system should ensure increased validity for sudden changes on average speed


UR.PC3.238 The system should ensure access to TIS for accidents black spots

High Driver Proactive Information Sustainability

UR.PC3.239 The system should ensure high data reliability for accidents black spots


UR.PC3.240 The system should ensure high data accurateness for accidents black spots

High Driver Proactive Information Sustainability

UR.PC3.241 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for accidents black spots


UR.PC3.242 The system should ensure increased validity for accidents black spots


UR.PC3.243 The system should ensure access to TIS for traffic conditions



Sustainability

UR.PC3.244 The system should ensure high data reliability for traffic conditions



Sustainability

UR.PC3.245 The system should ensure high data accurateness for traffic conditions



Sustainability

UR.PC3.246 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for traffic conditions



Sustainability

UR.PC3.247 The system should ensure increased validity for traffic conditions



Sustainability


Page | 133


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017



UR.PC3.248 The system should ensure access to TIS for traffic incidents


Sustainability

UR.PC3.249 The system should ensure high data reliability for traffic incidents


Sustainability

UR.PC3.250 The system should ensure high data accurateness for traffic incidents


Sustainability

UR.PC3.251 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for traffic incidents


Sustainability

UR.PC3.252 The system should ensure increased validity for traffic incidents


Sustainability

UR.PC3.253 The system should ensure access to TIS for information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route



Sustainability

UR.PC3.254 The system should ensure high data reliability for information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route



Sustainability

UR.PC3.255 The system should ensure high data accurateness for information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route



Sustainability

UR.PC3.256 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route



Sustainability

UR.PC3.257 The system should ensure increased validity for information regarding weather conditions/forecasts for specific route



Sustainability

UR.PC3.258 The system should ensure access to TIS for e-Call information


Sustainability

UR.PC3.259 The system should ensure high data reliability for e-Call information


Sustainability

UR.PC3.260 The system should ensure high data accurateness for e-Call information


Sustainability

UR.PC3.261 The system should ensure increased validity for e-Call information


Sustainability

UR.PC3.262 The system should ensure access to TIS for information on closest medical services (POIs)



UR.PC3.263 The system should ensure high data reliability for information on closest medical services (POIs)



UR.PC3.264 The system should ensure high data accurateness for information on closest medical services (POIs)



UR.PC3.265 The system should ensure high data refresh/ updating rate for information on closest medical services (POIs)




Page | 134


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017



UR.PC3.266 The system should ensure increased validity for information on closest medical services (POIs)




Page | 135


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

5 Conclusions This deliverable presents the work done in WP1 as part of the Task “Requirement Analysis”. It provides the specification of user requirements for the three (3) pilot cases expected to be implemented at the framework of the OPTIMUM project. The user requirements are based on surveys undertaken per pilot case and per pilot site. From the analysis of surveys results diverse user requirements are obtained per pilot case. The detailed requirements presented in this exercise was the result of the multi-dimensional analysis performed, namely:

State of the trip that information is required (pre-, on-, post-trip)

The nature of the information (static, real time, forcasted)

The communication channel used (web-site, mobile device, ITS infrastructure etc)

Other factors affecting use of some channels for receiving travelling related information (e.g. access to ITS, data reliability, validity etc)

The survey for Pilot Case 1 was conducted by the completion of on-line questionnaire with

participation of the (3) pilot sites. The total sample collected 309; 223 for Birmingham, 67 for

Vienna, and 19 for Slovenia. It is seen that the user requirements are closely coherent with the

scope of Pilot Case 1. The main requirements commonly identified by the end-users are

summarized below:

o In regards to data content, the dissemination of travel times per transport mode, the

real-time data for public transport arrivals at stops/ stations and the multi-modal

navigation service minimizing overall transport time is considered very important.

o The users seem to require travel data for long-term (more than 1 hour) and short-term

(less than 1hour) planning of trips. Besides, on-trip traveler information is considered

essential by the users for the provision of travel times per transport mode, traffic

incidents, scheduled traffic events and parking guidance information regarding parking

space availability.

o In regards to communication channels, web-site and mobile applications are evaluated

very high for the majority of various traveling data content. Electronic displays at public

transport stops/ stations which provide on real-time the expected time of public

transport arrivals are also considered essential. Besides, radio services are considered

quite significant for the deployment of traffic incidents and events.

o Android and iPhone are the main mobile platforms which are currently owned by users.

For Pilot Case 2, the acquisition by the roadside equipment of real-time traffic data information,

as well as, the integration of freight operators system with the Traffic Management Control

System to inform motorway operators promptly about the schedule trip seems to be a

significant requirement. Moreover, the determination of the algorithm with the various traffic


Page | 136


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

variables plays a significant role into the determination of dynamic toll charging which is

expected to be provided by the system. A major challenge is the adoption of this innovative

charging mechanism in practice with the existing electronic fee collection system which is

currently in operation in Portugal.

The survey for Pilot Case 3 was conducted by the completion of a questionnaire with the

participation of 26 campers which are the end-users of the system. It is concluded that the

OPTIMUM Pilot Case 3 objective is closely coherent to the user needs and requirements. The

users seem to require services primary for controlling the fuel consumption and secondly for

controlling the reduction of CO2 emissions. The services should be primarily focused on-trip

travelers’ support and the data origin, as it would be expected, should be real-time. Short-term

forecasts are also considered essential by campers. The main travelers’ communication

channels are considered the Smart on board units and the mobile applications. In respect to

sustainability, the data content of high interest are the shortest travel time, the traffic

conditions and traffic incidents information. In respect to travelers’ safety and security, the

data content of high interest is the sudden change on average speed, the traffic conditions and

the traffic incidents.

Based on the final determination of user requirements, it is seen that user requirements lying in

more than one potential OPTIMUM service. The user requirements, for each pilot case,

classified per potential OPTIMUM service, are illustrated in Appendix IV. The potential

OPTIMUM services are Navigation, (Re-)Routing, Tracking, Proactive Information and Charging

and Crediting


Page | 137


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

6 References Birmingham City Council, “Transport Study 2012/ 2013, Report of Findings”, April 2013.

Dumbill, Edd. Planning for big data, O'Reilly Media, Inc., 2012.

European Commission, “Public Consultation on the provision of EU-wide multimodal travel

information services under the ITS Directive 2010/40/EU”, Questionnaire.

European Commission (2013). Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 886/2013 of 15 May

2013 supplementing ITS Directive 2010/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the

Council with regard to data and procedures for the provision, where possible, of road

safety-related minimum universal traffic information free of charge to users. Brussels,

Official Journal of the European Union.

European Commission (2013). Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 885/2013 of 15 May

2013 supplementing ITS Directive 2010/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the

Council with regard to the provision of information services for safe and secure parking

for trucks and commercial vehicles, Brussels, Official Journal of the European Union.

European Commission (2014). Annex Data Categories (as referred in Articles 2,8,9,10 and 12) to

the Commission Delegated Regulation supplementing Directive 2010/40/EU of the

European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the provision of EU-wide real-

time traffic information services, Brussels.

European Parliament and of the Council (2010). Directive 2010/40/EU of the European

Parliament and the Council of 7 July 2010 on the framework for the deployment of

Intelligent Transport Systems in the field of road transport and for interfaces with other

modes of transport”, Brussels, Official Journal of the European Union.

UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs/Population Division, “World Urbanization

Prospects”, 2012


Page | 138


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

7 APPENDIX I: Pilot Case 1: Questionnaire

Attached in a separate document accompanying the deliverable.


Page | 139


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

8 APPENDIX II: Pilot Case 2: Questionnaire



Page | 140


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

9 APPENDIX III: Pilot Case 3: Questionnaire



Page | 141


Version 2.0, 10/04/2017

10 APPENDIX IV: User Requirements per

OPTIMUM Potential Service


Date post:	18-Nov-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

· Project Acronym: OPTIMUM Grant Agreement number: 636160 (H2020-MG-7.1 - RIA) Project Full...

Documents