# Listing of Road Weather Publications with "Fog" or "Visibility" Keyword

+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| **TITLE**        | **   | **ABSTRACT**                | ##          |
|                  | KEYW |                             | #### SOURCE |
|                  | ORD( |                             |             |
|                  | S)** |                             |             |
+==================+======+=============================+=============+
| ANALYSIS OF      | >    | > The Federal Highway       | > Mitretek  |
| WEATHER IMPACTS  |  Adv | > Administration\'s (FHWA)  | > Systems   |
| ON TRAFFIC FLOW  | erse | > Road Weather Management   | >           |
| IN METROPOLITAN  | >    | > Program (RWMP) has been   | > (lynett   |
| WASHINGTON, D.C. | weat | > sponsoring research into  | e.goodwin@m |
|                  | her, | > the impacts of weather on | itretek.org |
|                  | > Dr | > surface transportation.   | >           |
|                  | iver | > One specific research     | > or        |
|                  | > b  | > task involved attempting  | > 20        |
|                  | ehav | > to quantify the amount of | 2-488-3033) |
|                  | ior, | > travel delay imposed upon |             |
|                  | > M  | > drivers due to the        |             |
|                  | obil | > effects of inclement      |             |
|                  | ity, | > weather. This paper       |             |
|                  | >    | > describes two different   |             |
|                  | Pave | > methods used to           |             |
|                  | ment | > approximate travel delay  |             |
|                  | > co | > impacts of weather along  |             |
|                  | ndit | > specific roadway segments |             |
|                  | ion, | > around metropolitan       |             |
|                  | > Pr | > Washington, D.C.          |             |
|                  | ecip |                             |             |
|                  | itat |                             |             |
|                  | ion, |                             |             |
|                  | > W  |                             |             |
|                  | ind, |                             |             |
|                  | > Vi |                             |             |
|                  | sibi |                             |             |
|                  | lity |                             |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| DYNAMIC          | >    | > The Enterprise program is | > [Castle   |
| MESSAGING: A     |  Vis | > multi-state pooled-fund   | > Rock      |
| GUIDANCE         | ibil | > study group with a focus  | > Consulta  |
| DOCUMENT         | ity, | > on providing effective    | nts](http:/ |
| PROVIDING        | >    | > solutions for rural       | /enterprise |
| ADVISORY         | Trav | > transportation            | .prog.org/) |
| INFORMATION ON   | eler | > applications. Enterprise, |             |
| LOW-VISIBILITY   | >    | > in cooperation with the   |             |
| WARNING SYSTEMS  |  inf | > Arizona DOT, is           |             |
| BASED ON         | orma | > researching solutions for |             |
| RESEARCH AND     | tion | > problems motorists face   |             |
| ANALYSIS OF      |      | > in limited visibility     |             |
| DEPLOYED SYSTEMS |      | > situations. Identifies    |             |
|                  |      | > components of             |             |
|                  |      | > low-visibility warning    |             |
|                  |      | > systems and the           |             |
|                  |      | > techniques deployed by    |             |
|                  |      | > various states that best  |             |
|                  |      | > address improving safety  |             |
|                  |      | > by detecting low          |             |
|                  |      | > visibility events and     |             |
|                  |      | > disseminating advanced    |             |
|                  |      | > information to motorists  |             |
|                  |      | > as well further           |             |
|                  |      | > evaluating low-visibility |             |
|                  |      | > detection technologies    |             |
|                  |      | > during these conditions.  |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| EFFECTS OF       | >    | > On a two-mile test        | > Institute |
| VARIABLE SPEED   |  Vis | > roadway in Salt Lake      | > of        |
| LIMIT SIGNS ON   | ibil | > Valley, Utah; speed       | > Tra       |
| DRIVER BEHAVIOR  | ity, | > limits are varied based   | nsportation |
| DURING INCLEMENT | >    | > on visibility and traffic | > Engineers |
| WEATHER          | VSL, | > conditions using a        | > 2000      |
|                  | >    | > weighted average          | > Annual    |
|                  |  Fre | > algorithm and display via | > Meeting,  |
|                  | eway | > DMS. Reduction in speed   | >           |
|                  | >    | > deviation, reduction in   |  University |
|                  |  man | > crash frequency, and      | > of Utah   |
|                  | agem | > increase in overall mean  |             |
|                  | ent, | > speed resulted.           |             |
|                  | >    |                             |             |
|                  | Cras |                             |             |
|                  | hes, |                             |             |
|                  | >    |                             |             |
|                  |  Saf |                             |             |
|                  | ety, |                             |             |
|                  | >    |                             |             |
|                  | Mobi |                             |             |
|                  | lity |                             |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| EVALUATION OF    | >    | > The Caltrans Automated    | > <http:/   |
| CALTRANS         | Moto | > Warning System (CAWS)     | /www.path.b |
| DISTRICT 10      | rist | > entered service in        | erkeley.edu |
| AUTOMATED        | >    | > November 1996. The system | /PATH/Publi |
| WARNING SYSTEM:  |  war | > includes 36 speed         | cations/PDF |
| YEAR TWO         | ning | > monitoring sites, 9       | /PRR/99/PRR |
| PROGRESS REPORT  | >    | > weather stations, 9 DMS   | -99-28.pdf> |
|                  |  sys | > and TMC computer systems. |             |
|                  | tem, | > The independent           |             |
|                  | >    | > evaluation was carried    |             |
|                  |  Fre | > out by researchers at the |             |
|                  | eway | > University of California. |             |
|                  | >    | > The report bibliography   |             |
|                  |  man | > includes summaries of all |             |
|                  | agem | > highway fog warning       |             |
|                  | ent, | > systems for which         |             |
|                  | >    | > published information was |             |
|                  | ESS, | > available.                |             |
|                  | >    |                             |             |
|                  | DMS, |                             |             |
|                  | >    |                             |             |
|                  | Fog, |                             |             |
|                  | > S  |                             |             |
|                  | peed |                             |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| EVALUATION OF    | >    | > Investigation to          | > [www.cut  |
| MOTORISTS        | Fog, | > determine extent of fog   | r.eng.usf.e |
| WARNING SYSTEMS  | >    | > patterns and fog-related  | du/research |
| FOR FOG-RELATED  |  Vis | > incidents in the Tampa    | /fog.pdf](h |
| INCIDENTS IN THE | ibil | > Bay area, and suitable    | ttp://www.c |
| TAMPA BAY AREA   | ity, | > countermeasures to detect | utr.eng.usf |
|                  | >    | > and warn motorists of fog | .edu/resear |
|                  | ESS, | > conditions. Fog warning   | ch/fog.pdf) |
|                  | > In | > systems in Alabama,       |             |
|                  | cide | > Arkansas, Georgia, New    |             |
|                  | nts, | > Mexico, Tennessee, Idaho, |             |
|                  | >    | > New Jersey, South         |             |
|                  | Moto | > Carolina, Louisiana,      |             |
|                  | rist | > Oregon, Utah and          |             |
|                  | >    | > California are discussed. |             |
|                  |  war | > Types of fog, conditions  |             |
|                  | ning | > conducive to formation,   |             |
|                  | > sy | > and visibility detection  |             |
|                  | stem | > technologies are also     |             |
|                  |      | > covered.                  |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| GETTING CLEAR ON | >    | > Paper discusses a         | > [www.p    |
| FOG-RELATED      | Fog, | > four-step process         | ath.berkele |
| CRASHES IN TAMPA | > Vi | > employed to evaluate      | y.edu/\~lea |
| BAY              | sibi | > advanced fog-detection    | p/itsdecisi |
|                  | lity | > technologies and suggest  | on_resource |
|                  |      | > possible strategies to    | s/articles/ |
|                  |      | > address fog-related       | S_ite_0200_ |
|                  |      | > incidents in the Tampa    | fog_warning |
|                  |      | > Bay Area. See also        | .pdf](http: |
|                  |      | > EVALUATION OF MOTORISTS   | //www.path. |
|                  |      | > WARNING SYSTEMS FOR       | berkeley.ed |
|                  |      | > FOG-RELATED INCIDENTS IN  | u/~leap/its |
|                  |      | > THE TAMPA BAY AREA.       | decision_re |
|                  |      |                             | sources/art |
|                  |      |                             | icles/S_ite |
|                  |      |                             | _0200_fog_w |
|                  |      |                             | arning.pdf) |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| HAPPY MOTORING   | >    | > An automated fog and      | > <ht       |
| ON SAFER         | Fog, | > smoke warning system will | tp://gtrese |
| INTERSTATE       | >    | > be deployed on 14 miles   | archnews.ga |
| HIGHWAY:         |  Vis | > of Interstate 75 near     | tech.edu/re |
| HIGH-TECH FOG    | ibil | > Adel, Georgia. The system | shor/rh-ss0 |
| WARNING SYSTEM   | ity, | > includes 19 fog sensors,  | 1/fog.html> |
| DEVELOPED AT     | >    | > ESS, speed detectors and  |             |
| GEORGIA TECH     | DMS, | > CCTV. System software at  |             |
| WILL ISSUE       | >    | > GDOT\'s Atlanta TMC       |             |
| ADVISORIES TO    | Moto | > analyzes field data and   |             |
| MOTORISTS        | rist | > decides which messages to |             |
|                  | >    | > display on four DMS and   |             |
|                  |  war | > when to illuminate        |             |
|                  | ning | > streetlights. A           |             |
|                  | >    | > three-year evaluation is  |             |
|                  |  sys | > being planned.            |             |
|                  | tem, |                             |             |
|                  | >    |                             |             |
|                  |  Fre |                             |             |
|                  | eway |                             |             |
|                  | > ma |                             |             |
|                  | nage |                             |             |
|                  | ment |                             |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| IDAHO STORM      | >    | > Two phased test conducted | > <http:    |
| WARNING SYSTEM   |  Fre | > on I-84 in southeastern   | //www.itsdo |
| OPERATIONAL TEST | eway | > Idaho between 1998 and    | cs.fhwa.dot |
|                  | >    | > 1993 to (1) determine     | .gov/jpodoc |
|                  |  man | > accuracy of visibility    | s/repts_te/ |
|                  | agem | > sensors and (2) whether   | @cc01!.pdf> |
|                  | ent, | > DMS reduce vehicle speed  |             |
|                  | >    | > during low visibility     |             |
|                  | DMS, | > conditions.               |             |
|                  | >    |                             |             |
|                  | Trav |                             |             |
|                  | eler |                             |             |
|                  | >    |                             |             |
|                  | info |                             |             |
|                  | rmat |                             |             |
|                  | ion, |                             |             |
|                  | >    |                             |             |
|                  |  Vis |                             |             |
|                  | ibil |                             |             |
|                  | ity, |                             |             |
|                  | > Sp |                             |             |
|                  | eed, |                             |             |
|                  | >    |                             |             |
|                  | Mobi |                             |             |
|                  | lity |                             |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| IMPACT OF        | >    | > This paper investigates   | > Tra       |
| HIGHWAY          | Cras | > the impact of roadway     | nsportation |
| ILLUMINATION ON  | hes, | > illumination on traffic   | > Research  |
| TRAFFIC FATALITY | > L  | > fatalities over a large   | > Board     |
| IN VARIOUS       | ight | > geographic area. This     | > 81nd      |
| ROADWAY AND      | ing, | > research develops a       | > Annual    |
| ENVIRONMENTAL    | >    | > systematic approach to    | > Meeting,  |
| CONDITIONS       |  Adv | > assess the quality of     | > Search    |
|                  | erse | > service provided by the   | > TRIS      |
|                  | >    | > existing lighting system  | > http:     |
|                  | weat | > to traffic safety. Other  | //199.79.17 |
|                  | her, | > factors, such as roadway  | 9.82/sundev |
|                  | > Vi | > design, traffic, and      | /search.cfm |
|                  | sibi | > environmental conditions  |             |
|                  | lity | > at the time of crash, can |             |
|                  |      | > also be considered in the |             |
|                  |      | > study.                    |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| IMPROVED         | > L  | > This digest describes     | > <http:/   |
| VISIBILITY FOR   | ight | > several means, identified | /www.sicop. |
| SNOWPLOWING      | ing, | > in NCHRP Project 6-12,    | net/nchrp_r |
| OPERATIONS       | >    | > that could improve        | rd_250.pdf> |
|                  | Trav | > visibility for            |             |
|                  | eler | > snowplowing operations.   |             |
|                  | >    | > The project included a    |             |
|                  | info | > review of existing and    |             |
|                  | rmat | > proposed approaches for   |             |
|                  | ion, | > improving visibility for  |             |
|                  | > Wi | > snowplowing operations,   |             |
|                  | nter | > the identification and    |             |
|                  | > st | > development of potential  |             |
|                  | orm, | > means for improving these |             |
|                  | > Vi | > operations, and the       |             |
|                  | sibi | > conduct of limited field  |             |
|                  | lity | > tests to evaluate the     |             |
|                  |      | > potential benefits of     |             |
|                  |      | > these means.              |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| INTELLIGENT      | > Mo | > In November 1999, the     | > Tra       |
| VEHICLE          | bile | > United States DOT FHWA    | nsportation |
| INITIATIVE -     | >    | > awarded a major           | > Research  |
| SPECIALTY        | sens | > Intelligent Vehicle       | > Board     |
| VEHICLE PLATFORM | ing, | > Initiative (IVI) grant to | > 82nd      |
| RESULTS FROM     | >    | > the Minnesota Department  | > Annual    |
| MINNESOTA\'S     |  Mai | > of Transportation. The    | > Meeting,  |
| FIELD            | nten | > intent of the project was | > Search    |
| OPERATIONAL TEST | ance | > to identify the safety    | > TRIS      |
|                  | >    | > and operational impacts   | > http:     |
|                  | vehi | > of the technology, to     | //199.79.17 |
|                  | cle, | > guide future decisions    | 9.82/sundev |
|                  | >    | > regarding installation on | /search.cfm |
|                  |  Vis | > specialized vehicles, and |             |
|                  | ibil | > to encourage the          |             |
|                  | ity, | > development and           |             |
|                  | > P  | > appropriate deployment of |             |
|                  | rodu | > such systems on all       |             |
|                  | ctiv | > vehicle platforms. The    |             |
|                  | ity, | > technologies were tested  |             |
|                  | > Sa | > in four snowplows, a      |             |
|                  | fety | > State Patrol squad car,   |             |
|                  |      | > and an ambulance on a     |             |
|                  |      | > fifty-mile rural highway. |             |
|                  |      | > This paper provides an    |             |
|                  |      | > overview of the project   |             |
|                  |      | > including technologies,   |             |
|                  |      | > evaluation, and findings. |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| MEASUREMENT OF   | >    | > This paper introduces a   | > Tra       |
| MOTORIST\'S      |  Vis | > new road visibility index | nsportation |
| RELATIVE         | ibil | > referred to as the        | > Research  |
| VISIBILITY INDEX | ity, | > motorists\' relative      | > Board     |
| (MRVI) THROUGH   | >    | > visibility index (MRVI).  | > 81st      |
| VIDEO IMAGES     | CCTV | > This index represents the | > Annual    |
|                  |      | > amount of visual          | > Meeting,  |
|                  |      | > information lost to the   | > Search    |
|                  |      | > view of motorists due to  | > TRIS      |
|                  |      | > atmospheric conditions in | > http:     |
|                  |      | > relation to the visual    | //199.79.17 |
|                  |      | > information available on  | 9.82/sundev |
|                  |      | > an ideal clear day. MRVI  | /search.cfm |
|                  |      | > is computed using readily |             |
|                  |      | > available video images of |             |
|                  |      | > roadways using relatively |             |
|                  |      | > simple image processing   |             |
|                  |      | > techniques. MRVI is a     |             |
|                  |      | > road condition indicator  |             |
|                  |      | > and can be used for       |             |
|                  |      | > control of DMS, analysis  |             |
|                  |      | > of visibility effects on  |             |
|                  |      | > motorists, road closure   |             |
|                  |      | > decisions, and for fast   |             |
|                  |      | > identification of low     |             |
|                  |      | > visibility areas or time  |             |
|                  |      | > periods from a very large |             |
|                  |      | > set of images collected   |             |
|                  |      | > from multiple video       |             |
|                  |      | > cameras.                  |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| OPERATOR         | >    | > Research conducted on a   | > 7th World |
| INTERFACE DESIGN |  Vis | > two-lane, rural state     | > Congress  |
| OF A LANE        | ibil | > highway in Minnesota in   | > on ITS,   |
| AWARENESS SYSTEM | ity, | > low visibility            | >           |
| FOR SNOW REMOVAL | >    | > conditions.               |  University |
| OPERATIONS       |  Mai | > Vehicle-mounted,          | > of Iowa   |
|                  | nten | > magnetic, lane-tracking   |             |
|                  | ance | > system displaying lane    |             |
|                  | >    | > position through a        |             |
|                  | vehi | > prototype user interface  |             |
|                  | cle, | > with continuous visual    |             |
|                  | >    | > reference to centerline   |             |
|                  |  Saf | > or shoulder line, as well |             |
|                  | ety, | > as peripheral modalities  |             |
|                  | > M  | > (i.e., directional seat   |             |
|                  | obil | > vibration, peripheral     |             |
|                  | ity, | > visual displays in        |             |
|                  | >    | > windshield corners, and   |             |
|                  | Prod | > an optional auditory      |             |
|                  | ucti | > warning). Could result in |             |
|                  | vity | > improved safety of        |             |
|                  |      | > operator and public,      |             |
|                  |      | > improved service levels   |             |
|                  |      | > (mobility) and reduced    |             |
|                  |      | > cost for snow removal     |             |
|                  |      | > operation operations and  |             |
|                  |      | > reduced economic impact   |             |
|                  |      | > on region. (productivity) |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| RURAL ITS        | > Wi | > Presents emerging ITS     | > Tra       |
| APPLICATIONS FOR | nter | > concepts and products for | nsportation |
| SNOW MAINTENANCE | >    | > winter maintenance safety | > Research  |
| AND WINTER       | main | > developed from the Ideas  | > Board,    |
| HAZARD           | tena | > Deserving Exploratory     | > Search    |
| MITIGATION       | nce, | > Analysis (IDEA) program   | > TRIS      |
|                  | > Av | > managed by Transportation | > http:     |
|                  | alan | > Research Board. Includes  | //199.79.17 |
|                  | che, | > fleet management,         | 9.82/sundev |
|                  | >    | > avalanche detection and   | /search.cfm |
|                  |  Vis | > gateway management        |             |
|                  | ibil | > system, fiber-optic-based |             |
|                  | ity, | > visibility information    |             |
|                  | >    | > system, and road          |             |
|                  | Pave | > condition sensor system   |             |
|                  | ment | > concepts/products.        |             |
|                  | > co |                             |             |
|                  | ndit |                             |             |
|                  | ion, |                             |             |
|                  | > Sa |                             |             |
|                  | fety |                             |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| STATE OF THE     | >    | > DOTs from 49 states (all  | > Virginia  |
| PRACTICE AND     | Fog, | > but Virginia) were        | > Tech      |
| REVIEW OF THE    | >    | > contacted in an effort to | > Research  |
| LITERATURE:      |  Vis | > document the fog          | > Council   |
| SURVEY OF FOG    | ibil | > countermeasures that are  |             |
| COUNTERMEASURES  | ity, | > currently in use or being |             |
| PLANNED OR IN    | >    | > planned by the other      |             |
| USE BY OTHER     |  Tra | > states. The results are   |             |
| STATES           | ffic | > presented in the report,  |             |
|                  | > ma | > along with the contact    |             |
|                  | nage | > name and phone number or  |             |
|                  | ment | > email address for each    |             |
|                  |      | > state.                    |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| SYNTHESIS OF     | >    | > The purpose of this       | > <http://  |
| BEST PRACTICES   |  Mai | > research project is to    | www.ctre.ia |
| FOR INCREASING   | nten | > study current practices   | state.edu/r |
| PROTECTION AND   | ance | > in enhancing visibility   | eports/visi |
| VISIBILITY OF    | >    | > and protection of highway | bility.pdf> |
| HIGHWAY          | vehi | > maintenance vehicles      |             |
| MAINTENANCE      | cle, | > involved in moving        |             |
| VEHICLES         | >    | > operations such as snow   |             |
|                  |  Vis | > removal and shoulder      |             |
|                  | ibil | > operations, crack         |             |
|                  | ity, | > sealing, and pothole      |             |
|                  | > Wi | > patching. This project    |             |
|                  | nter | > report provides the most  |             |
|                  | >    | > recent information on     |             |
|                  |  mai | > current moving operation  |             |
|                  | nten | > practices throughout the  |             |
|                  | ance | > country and the state of  |             |
|                  |      | > Iowa. It will enable the  |             |
|                  |      | > maintenance staff to      |             |
|                  |      | > adequately assess the     |             |
|                  |      | > applicability and impact  |             |
|                  |      | > of each strategy to their |             |
|                  |      | > use and budget. The       |             |
|                  |      | > report\'s literature      |             |
|                  |      | > review chapter examines   |             |
|                  |      | > the use of maintenance    |             |
|                  |      | > vehicle warning lights,   |             |
|                  |      | > retroreflective tapes,    |             |
|                  |      | > shadow vehicles and       |             |
|                  |      | > truck-mounted attenuators |             |
|                  |      | > (TMAs), and advanced      |             |
|                  |      | > vehicle control systems   |             |
|                  |      | > (AVCSs), as well as other |             |
|                  |      | > practices to improve      |             |
|                  |      | > visibility for both       |             |
|                  |      | > snowplow operators and    |             |
|                  |      | > vehicles.                 |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| TESTING THE      | >    | > There are many advisory   | >           |
| ADVERSE          |  Vis | > systems to warn drivers   |  University |
| VISIBILITY       | ibil | > of fog. However, warning  | > of Utah,  |
| INFORMATION      | ity, | > drivers that there is fog | > Tra       |
| SYSTEM           | >    | > ahead does not instruct   | nsportation |
| EVALUATION       | Fog, | > them on what to do.       | > Research  |
| (ADVISE) - SAFER | >    | > During the 1995-2000      | > Board     |
| DRIVING IN FOG   |  Tra | > winter seasons, a new     | > 81st      |
|                  | ffic | > technology known as the   | > Annual    |
|                  | >    | > Adverse Visibility        | > Meeting   |
|                  |  man | > Information System        |             |
|                  | agem | > Evaluation (ADVISE) was   |             |
|                  | ent, | > tested. ADVISE uses       |             |
|                  | > S  | > visibility sensors to     |             |
|                  | peed | > determine current sight   |             |
|                  | >    | > distance and              |             |
|                  |  man | > corresponding safe speed  |             |
|                  | agem | > for the prevailing        |             |
|                  | ent, | > conditions. DMS instruct  |             |
|                  | >    | > drivers of safe speed.    |             |
|                  | DMS, | > This research measures    |             |
|                  | > M  | > the effectiveness of the  |             |
|                  | obil | > system in reducing the    |             |
|                  | ity, | > variability between       |             |
|                  | >    | > speeds. ADVISE            |             |
|                  |  Saf | > successfully reduced      |             |
|                  | ety, | > speed variability by an   |             |
|                  | >    | > average 22 percent.       |             |
|                  |  Cra |                             |             |
|                  | shes |                             |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| THE EFFECT OF    | >    | > Free flow speed is        | > Tra       |
| WEATHER ON FREE  | Pave | > affected by pavement      | nsportation |
| FLOW SPEED       | ment | > conditions, visibility    | > Research  |
|                  | > co | > and wind speeds. The      | > Board     |
|                  | ndit | > effects of poor weather   | > 80th      |
|                  | ion, | > should be considered in   | > Annual    |
|                  | >    | > such cases as part of     | > Meeting,  |
|                  |  Vis | > capacity and              | >           |
|                  | ibil | > level-of-service          |  University |
|                  | ity, | > analyses.                 | > of Idaho  |
|                  | > W  |                             |             |
|                  | ind, |                             |             |
|                  | >    |                             |             |
|                  |  Adv |                             |             |
|                  | erse |                             |             |
|                  | >    |                             |             |
|                  | weat |                             |             |
|                  | her, |                             |             |
|                  | > C  |                             |             |
|                  | apac |                             |             |
|                  | ity, |                             |             |
|                  | > M  |                             |             |
|                  | obil |                             |             |
|                  | ity, |                             |             |
|                  | > S  |                             |             |
|                  | peed |                             |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| THE USE OF       | > S  | > Research involves traffic | > Tra       |
| MOBILE VIDEO     | now, | > and weather data (i.e.,   | nsportation |
| DATA COLLECTION  | >    | > visibility, roadway snow  | > Research  |
| EQUIPMENT TO     |  Vis | > cover, volume, speed, and | > Board     |
| INVESTIGATE      | ibil | > headway/gap data)         | > 79th      |
| WINTER WEATHER   | ity, | > collected by a            | > Annual    |
| VEHICLE SPEEDS   | >    | > trailer-mounted video     | > Meeting,  |
|                  |  Adv | > data                      | > Search    |
|                  | erse | > collection/monitoring     | > TRIS      |
|                  | >    | > system. Collected data    | > http:     |
|                  | weat | > used to predict vehicle   | //199.79.17 |
|                  | her, | > speed and speed           | 9.82/sundev |
|                  | >    | > variability. Results      | /search.cfm |
|                  |  Veh | > indicate that average     |             |
|                  | icle | > winter weather speed was  |             |
|                  | > de | > 16 percent lower than     |             |
|                  | tect | > that in speed under dry   |             |
|                  | ion, | > conditions. In winter     |             |
|                  | > S  | > weather, speed variation  |             |
|                  | peed | > was 307 percent higher    |             |
|                  |      | > than variation during dry |             |
|                  |      | > conditions. The resulting |             |
|                  |      | > model predicted that      |             |
|                  |      | > off-peak winter weather   |             |
|                  |      | > speeds would decrease by  |             |
|                  |      | > 3.9 mph when visibility   |             |
|                  |      | > fell below one-quarter    |             |
|                  |      | > mile, and decrease by 7.3 |             |
|                  |      | > mph when snow began to    |             |
|                  |      | > cover roadway lanes.      |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| USE OF EXPERT    | >    | > Automated systems for     | > <htt      |
| SYSTEMS FOR      | Fog, | > forecasting frost and fog | p://www.ctr |
| ROADWAY WEATHER  | >    | > on roads and bridges      | e.iastate.e |
| MAINTENANCE      | Pave | > using expert systems were | du/pubs/sem |
| DECISIONS        | ment | > deployed in Iowa.         | isesq/sessi |
|                  | > co |                             | on5/takle/> |
|                  | ndit |                             |             |
|                  | ion, |                             |             |
|                  | > F  |                             |             |
|                  | orec |                             |             |
|                  | asts |                             |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+
| VIDEO CAMERAS    | > C  | > A researcher has          | > [www.i    |
| FOCUS ON         | CTV, | > developed a technique for | ts.umn.edu/ |
| VISIBILITY       | >    | > automatically measuring   | news/visibi |
|                  | ESS, | > visibility with video     | lity.html]( |
|                  | > Vi | > cameras. The camera is    | http://www. |
|                  | sibi | > aligned to detect         | its.umn.edu |
|                  | lity | > contrasting portions of   | /news/visib |
|                  |      | > targets in order to       | ility.html) |
|                  |      | > generate a signal         |             |
|                  |      | > indicative of contrast    |             |
|                  |      | > levels. A processor uses  |             |
|                  |      | > the signal to compute     |             |
|                  |      | > visibility. Prototype     |             |
|                  |      | > system was installed on   |             |
|                  |      | > northbound Highway 35     |             |
|                  |      | > near Duluth, Minnesota.   |             |
+------------------+------+-----------------------------+-------------+