Acknowledgements

David Albright, Research Bureau Chief New Mexico State Highway and Transportation Department, has been an essential part of the development of the SVID concept and the foundations of the SET initiative. This paper includes extractions from several of his papers and congressional testimony. Hank Dittmar and Don Chen, Surface Transportation Policy Project (STPP), and Judith Espinosa, Alliance for Transportation Research (ATR) have all played a major role in defining and developing the human element of the concepts. Basil Barna, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) contributed to development of key points within the SET initiative. Mike Moulton and Phil Heermann, Sandia National Laboratories, contributed heavily to the systems engineering and modeling and simulation concepts central to the SET initiative.

In the past, transportation has progressed by optimizing each transportation mode independently of another. Canals, railroads, and highways have each played important roles in different times and in different ways. Although there has been and continues to be an economic interest in making the connection among modes efficient, modal research, planning, implementation, construction, maintenance and evaluation mechanisms are often considered separate rather than unified.

Fragmentation exists within as well as among transportation modes. Separate, static design of vehicles and infrastructure creates inefficiency and unanticipated effects. In highway transportation, for example, this is seen in premature pavement failure from lack of cooperative vehicle and infrastructure design. It is seen in safety problems such as initial design of antilock braking systems not anticipating pavement deformation at intersections, and initial design of airbags not accommodating some passengers. The problems are also manifested in the negative impact of traffic and noise on some neighborhoods and communities.

The cost of fragmentation is high. This splintered approach unfortunately only optimizes parts of the system and unwittingly accepts secondary, negative affects. Regrettably, the cost of secondary effects on the system may be as great or greater than the benefit from the optimized subsystem performance and is sometimes unrealized until much later in the life cycle.

In some instances, secondary costs are significant, but difficult to express in economic terms. The cost of failure is expressed in loss of human life through accidents, high energy utilization, environmental degradation and resulting impact on health, and decreased defense readiness. Some costs associated with failure of the transportation system can be more readily quantified. Cost of congestion, for example, can be calculated in urban areas. Cost can be calculated in reduced competitiveness of transportation products and services, and the industries that they support, due to inadequately understood system interface or product acceptance. Improved transportation products and services are needed not only to better serve today’s economy but to also help define future markets.

The separation of functions within and among modes results in denial if not removal of responsibility for the negative system effects of transportation products and services. Public and private transportation investments should be based on system performance, rather than optimizing parts of the system then trying to mitigate unanticipated results that are secondary to the subsystem but primary to a sustainable transportation system.

In 1991 the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) acknowledged the importance of treating the nation’s transportation system as an integrated, intermodal system. While few have argued with the merits of this concept, there has been little substantive progress in achieving this goal due to a limited transportation information infrastructure, limited desirable transportation alternatives, and a lack of viable models and tools to guide policy decisions and technology development and to suggest leverage points in the transportation system.

While there is growing recognition and effort underway to better integrate transportation system elements, a number of the issues noted above have only been considered in a piecemeal manner. There is a need to design and develop vehicles and infrastructure in an interactive environment that explicitly considers humanistic needs and to analyze broader transportation issues in the same, integrated environment. There is a need to move from system fragmentation to Systems Engineering for Transportation (SET). Systems engineering offers the potential to address the nation’s transportation requirements as a system rather than as a collection of subsystems. Each transportation mode can benefit from such an approach to transportation. This is true for highways, air, rail and transit. In addition, the interconnections among modes may be more effectively assessed. There is the potential to enhance economic competitiveness and reduce unacceptable problems and facilitate safe, efficient, equitable and environmentally responsible movement of people, goods and ideas.

The Simultaneous Vehicle and Infrastructure Design (SVID) wheel was developed as a reference graphic to depict the three major elements of a transportation system (user, vehicle and infrastructure), their relationship between one another, and the level of interaction that must be considered during the design process using the systems engineering approach. The graphic represents the key issues in a true systems engineering for transportation approach where all aspects of the dependent elements, from detailed engineering to national issues, must be explicitly considered and where the vehicles and infrastructure must be attractive to the users.

In the graphic, there are three spokes extending out from the hub of the wheel representing elements of the transportation system noted above: user, vehicle and infrastructure. These three elements are then broken down into three concentric circles. The first, innermost circle to the hub represents a specific subject, whether user, vehicle or infrastructure. From a systems perspective, the innermost circle represents the observer or observers and their experiences. The second, middle circle represents types of subjects and their function. This circle is the type of modal vehicle; general infrastructure; and groups of users or markets. The third, outer circle is the environment within which subject types are formed and function. The third circle is materials and processes in vehicle construction; modal settings, and community experience. The connotations of the graphic will change dramatically as one considers the extent of implications of an issue when viewed from the range of local to regional to national interests. In this wider perspective the graphic has grown beyond its acronym of SVID and perhaps should more appropriately be called the Systems Engineering for Transportation (SET) wheel.

Systems engineering is a discipline initially developed by the government of the United States to develop large, complex and multidisciplinary systems. One reasonable definition describes systems engineering as "A logical sequence of activities and decisions transforming an operational need into a description of system performance parameters and a preferred systems configuration." In the context of this paper, the systems engineering approach would be utilized within the perspective of the SET wheel to develop a framework to describe and represent the nation’s transportation system and to then develop a set of decision support tools that would aid in reviewing the system’s performance in the context of competing strategies and assumptions. Increasing transportation options and efficiency requires technology that integrates key aspects and modes of transportation from a systems perspective and, in return, is able to subsequently demonstrate the collective insight to the transportation community and the public. Such a systems approach requires a transportation analysis infrastructure that is based on models and simulations that accurately describe where transportation alternatives and efficiencies can have the most impact. Due to the complexity of relevant issues and the breadth of the necessary disciplines involved, it is critical that the transportation analysis models and simulations be science based and developed in a manner to include and convey all life cycle issues to a broad spectrum of participants.

These needs have been explored with public and private vehicle and infrastructure interests, as well as non-governmental organizations concerned with energy, environment, and social equity. While there is general agreement that the need is urgent, and the systems concept may be helpful, there has not been a clear sense of how the concept could be put into practice beyond encouraging dialogue. What is needed is a means to expand the concept through basic research and to validate, or test, the concept by applying and demonstrating the benefits of the developed ideas and research to a specific national transportation issue.

A Systems Engineering for Transportation Test Capability is proposed. The initiative would create an appropriate environment where systems engineering for transportation could be evaluated and where developing tools could facilitate analysis and design of system level transportation issues. The initiative would not duplicate nor obsolete existing modeling or testing capabilities. Rather, the SET Test Capability would integrate existing research and test centers, creating a virtual environment to integrate existing and future research and decision support tools together for use by a wide range of public and private users. The SET Test Capability would enable system performance questions to be addressed, evaluated and discussed in an environment which goes beyond our current capabilities .

The SET Test Capability will need to achieve several different objectives in order to successfully meet the needs enunciated above:

Transportation systems engineering approach from the SET wheel perspective to provide an integrated, balanced description of transportation issues.

Science based, life cycle engineering model and simulation to provide a consistent mechanism for combining equally valid but disparate perspectives of the same issue.

Field test/operational data validation from a wide range of public and private test and data collection entities to verify and update models and simulations.

Consideration of local to national implications to ensure inclusion of all pertinent aspects in reviewing specific issues.

Facilitate collaboration among diverse parties to achieve true systems perspective of specific issues.

Visualization of interactions to facilitate solid understanding of implications of alternative perspectives and technical models of specific issues.

User facility orientation for the Test Capability to encourage its usage and continued growth through a wide spectrum of stakeholders at remote centers.

Proprietary and classified information protection to encourage all parties to bring the latest, most accurate data, information and models to the enterprize and to encourage utilization of the analysis environment.

The SET Test Capability would develop the framework (physical as well as virtual) for integrated and coordinated transportation system research and investigations from a extended partnership within a modeling and simulation environment. The SET modeling and simulation decision support capability is expected to be developed and implemented as a distributed computing system. In order to integrate the knowledge of an extremely broad based set of disciplines and to then allow for subsequent communications and discussion of the combined systems level implications, it is critical that the SET model and simulation environment be science based and emphasize life cycle systems engineering. Equally important will be the test and validation of the SET models and simulation through system level testing in a virtual SET test environment in concert with existing test centers.

Coordination, integration and visualization of transportation models and test results, from a wide range of public, university, and private partners distributed over a wide physical area, will be necessary and will require new research in advanced scientific methods, high end computing, policy modeling and advanced information technologies. This environment will be implemented to support decisions that give the best benefits for minimal cost.

Developing technologies and processes that will form the basis for the proposed capabilities are being investigated by other national programs and are making rapid progress. Historically, engineers and scientists in the transportation arena, as well as most other professions, progressed new ideas and concepts by consecutively considering small portions of the issues involved in building large complex systems. While this allowed each element to be considered in detail, this approach was not conducive to understanding the many and varied interactions, and induced secondary effects of those complex systems. Indeed, this problem was

aggravated by the difficulty of conveying the details and underlying assumption of individual studies to one’s colleagues. Recent advancements in computing technologies, such as massively parallel computing, now allow investigators to address complex systems directly rather than via assumption or simplification. Major improvements in networking feeds and speed of transferring information allow virtual experiments to be run on physically separate parallel computers and to have real world test and operational data to influence the models in real time if appropriate. Continued improvement in computer and information security will allow the sharing of appropriate information during collective efforts while protecting classified and proprietary information. Finally, recent advances in displaying information in a contextual visualization will allow parties with different perspectives to view the collective systems description and the implications of underlying assumptions and proposed changes. Successful integration of these technologies will facilitate the main emphasis of the initiative in bringing together a wide range of stakeholders in transportation systems to investigate new alternatives and to make informed decisions.

The proposed SET Test Capability is a response to urgent national need; but there must be a clear demonstration of the feasibility of the approach and the team’s ability to develop such a capability to meet the need. A Proof of Principle is recommended to demonstrate that the concept can be implemented. Utilizing a Proof of Principle to initiate significant research such as the SET Test Capability is beneficial in several regards. A Proof of Principle focuses on metrics of success, which is helpful in the transition from scientifically significant research to useful research products, and by building on early successes the Proof of Principle reduces the funding risk for the long term. Finally, a Proof of Principle initiates constructive communication between the sponsoring agency and the research partnership. This builds confidence both in conduct of the Proof of Principle and in assessment of general capabilities that may be employed in other efforts.

The four suggested elements of success for the SET Test Capability Proof of Principle are: 1) base research in need; 2) address need from underlying science; 3) define both technical and program success; and 4) build an effective research partnership. These elements of a successful Proof of Principle are described below:

Research must be in response to well-framed questions and well-defined, challenging needs. Fundamental research with the potential to significantly enhance the transportation system and its associated products and services must be based in enduring, challenging and urgent need. This is descriptive of transportation as well as other sectors of our society in which the nation’s science and technology base may be meaningful employed.

The need must be understood before technical competencies can be meaningfully employed. Understanding the need is necessary, but not sufficient. In the absence of exceptional technical competencies to resolve issues in an innovative and impartial manner, institutional barriers, intransigence and cynicism tend to constrict research, development and constructive change.

A major challenge to the Proof of Principle would be to define the modeling, simulation and test architecture and approaches appropriate to the very formidable long term goal of understanding the nation’s infrastructure as a transportation system and yet focus the efforts during the Proof of Principle to a specific issue in order to demonstrably affect an improvement. Further, the technical proof must include the ability to integrate information from existing, separate facilities to dynamically assess proposed options to meet the defined need and support the rendering of proper decisions. The institutional proof must include the ability to bring together public, private and non-governmental entities employing the technical capability to improve transportation program decisions, products and services. An important problem which could address all of these considerations as the Proof of Principle is to analyze and begin to improve highway vehicle/infrastructure performance and support the decision making process in these areas. It is recommended the Proof of Principle be cooperatively selected and the scope agreed upon by RSPA and the proposed partnership.

The principle must be proven in response to significant transportation need and must be proven in relation to the feasibility and desirability of implementing the response. It is for this reason the SET Test Capability partnership must include exceptional technical competencies combined with exceptional experience in public and private teamwork. Other public and private organizations will be added to the team; but necessarily for specific strengths added to help meet the need, rather than for expediency.

Fundamental research is important to address the enduring challenges in transportation. Competitive world pressures coupled with increasingly complicated interdependencies between national defense, environmental and social issues, and the transportation system’s efficiency have greatly increased the complexity of understanding and upgrading the national transportation system to meet new challenges. Past efforts to model the transportation system and its elements made a number of simplifying interdependency and engineering assumptions that can no longer be supported. The nation’s science and technology base can and should address national needs from the underlying science in order to fully understand the interrelationships that potentially span the spectrum from very basic materials science to national challenges. The Proof of Principle proposes to address a need for better understanding of the underlying issues and for identifying the scientific challenges raised in attempting to address the need and for supporting cost effective decisions.

The proposed SET Test Capability will present scientific challenges. One set of challenges relates to considering transportation as a system rather than collection of subsystems to support informed decisions. This will require the design and development of new computational processes and tools that can be utilized quickly and effectively by program managers. Meeting the challenges associated with systems engineering may well identify another set of challenges to information science. The general systems and information science challenges, however, will be associated with any selected problem for the Proof of Principle.

Systems Engineering for Transportation (SET) will provide a conceptual framework to represent the transportation system and the capability to become a decision support system for transportation managers and engineers. In this, SET is concerned with systems science and the use of that science to support informed cost effective decisions. From the SET framework, processes and tools are proposed to improve transportation analysis, design options and decisions. The framework, boundary interface for the defined system, and relationship between the framework, processes and tools will require innovative theoretical work. The SET framework will require thoughtful processes and tools for integrated transportation analysis and design. This system framework and these tools do not now exist, and their feasibility must be part of the underlying science demonstrated in the Proof of Principle.

In recent years, computer modeling and analysis has been used to evaluate different design options in a cost effective manner ("what if") and to refine a design before building the first prototype or starting construction. This results in better products and services with fewer unanticipated problems to resolve. Early computer models were often computer implementations of engineering equations. Because engineering procedures are often generalizations of science principles that are simplified to aid understanding and speed design, these models are not capable of predicting complex interactions. The SET Test Capability seeks to replace the simplified engineering design equations with a new generation of predictive models and simulation tools that would be at the disposal of the transportation system/subsystem managers. These models will allow highly complex system components to be evaluated as they interact. Within the SET framework, accurate science based models can be combined with economic and environmental models to move beyond subsystem optimization to full system optimization in the most cost effective manner.

Transportation data are extensive, complex and changing. The SET framework will be required to integrate extensive and complex operational and test data, if the data are to both serve as useful information and as a basis for validating the simulation and modeling research which will ultimately form the foundation for efficient decision making. Factors of interest in transportation data needs will change as new questions are asked about the system and new metrics are suggested to indicate system performance. The nature of transportation base data will present a challenge in data representation and its interrelationships to more complex issues and how the decision makers might utilize those data. It is also a challenge in visualizing complex data to provide understanding to individuals from diverse backgrounds and perform the decision support functions necessary to be useful. This challenge is, in part, one of visualization where the data and the interrelationships must be displayed without the format corrupting the veracity of the data and the underlying science models. With development of innovative processes and tools, issues of information integrity and clarity will likely emerge. The SET Test Capability will need to push and expand the current state of the art in data visualization to meet these difficult challenges to information science.

Technical success for the Proof of Principle should include demonstration of the capability, with some specific problem addressed. A compelling example is highway vehicle and infrastructure interface. The capability could permit an integrated understanding of the full spectrum of related issues from vehicle suspension, tire characteristics, and infrastructure design and maintenance procedures through alternative transportation system solutions. With limited funds for highway construction and maintenance, it is imperative that the transportation system increase its efficiency and lower its overall costs. The proposed test capability would allow all proposed alternatives to be examined, understood, and performance specifications improved in a very cost effective manner.

The proposed highway vehicle and infrastructure interface example would require involvement of vehicle manufacturers, highway designers, public and private construction companies, and a variety of other concerned organizations to make informed cost effective decisions. This example could also serve to demonstrate and validate public involvement in the process. A highly efficient interaction between vehicle and highway must also be acceptable to the public in regard to noise and cost. The assessment of noise and impact on neighborhoods also helps describe the importance of placing the innovative work in the context of systems engineering. Any potential solutions to improve highway performance must ultimately be assessed in relation to the environment; tracing the current design and proposed solution from extraction of raw materials to recycling and the associated cost to the public. The challenge for the Proof of Principle initiative with this example would be to work within the narrow boundaries of a fledgling program and to still address a broad enough set of issues to show the value of SET. Again, it is recommended that the specific Proof of Principle and its scope be cooperatively selected and the scope agreed upon by RSPA and the proposed partnership.

A successful technical Proof of Principle should address the SET conceptual framework, and processes and tools for transportation design and analysis. A formidable technical challenge will be to advance the science and engineering of transportation and to do so in a way involves a wide range of public, private and non-governmental interests in an inclusive partnership. Program success is an extended partnership participating in the process such that the SET Test Capability provides and the partnership uses the resulting decision support tools in development of policies, products and services.

The potential value of the SET conceptual framework must be the proven value of the SET Test Capability. An idea to change and hopefully improve some aspect of transportation must be placed in context of the system as a whole, and refined as a result. In the suggested example, the SET Test Capability Proof of Principle would integrate vehicle, infrastructure and user knowledge and data to model improvement in design. Alternative improvements would be assessed in context of how they would affect the transportation system as a whole. The impact on the user, as an individual and in community, on vehicle and infrastructure would be assessed. Technical success is the ability to make the assessment and support effective decisions in a timely manner. Program success is the ability to communicate and implement the assessment with a cost effective process.

In research projects, team building is concerned primarily with sustaining the technical team at a peak level of performance throughout the project. In a Proof of Principle, the concern is to bring the right persons together to prove, or disprove, the principle within the agreed upon time line.

Because all modes can benefit, the Research and Special Projects Administration (RSPA) is well-positioned to advance a systems capability on behalf of each of the modal administrations. In cooperation with RSPA, a core partnership will be needed to prove the principle and, if successful, move toward implementation. The idea for the SET Test Capability began with Sandia National Laboratories, and it is proposed that they lead the partnership. Sandia National Laboratories and Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) have the critical enabling technology and personnel to lead in providing tools and processes for systems engineering in transportation design and analysis. In addition, the laboratories share responsibility for a systems approach to hazardous material and waste transport within the U.S. Department of Energy and have shown the ability to work with very diverse organizations to formulate unbiased, collaborative results. From the beginning, the New Mexico State Highway and Transportation Dept. and the Alliance for Transportation Research Institute have supported this work and have played a vital role in the dialogue on simultaneous vehicle and infrastructure design. Their combined commitment to and experience in public involvement in transportation research make both an important part of the team.

Working with RSPA, with these organizations at the core, other organizational interests could be attracted and meaningfully engaged to help demonstrate the Proof of Principle. Participation of DOT agencies, other federal laboratories, and universities is critically important to provide both the fundamental transportation and science knowledge and the connection to public and private organizations. A unique blend of public and educational institutes will be essential to serve as hubs for communication. Other universities will be needed to work with the laboratories, improve the tools, and help apply the tools in cooperation with other public agencies and the private sector.

The private sector is essential to the Proof of Principle. First, private companies involved in vehicles and infrastructure must be involved in developing the tools and processes to achieve technical success. The private sector defines program success in implementing the tools and moving toward system-supporting products and services.

The SET Test Capability must include the public as a partner in research. The transportation system attempts to accommodate people in their interest to move themselves, their ideas and objects from one point to another. How broad-based, diverse interests have an opportunity to interact with the SET Test Capability process and results during the Proof of Principle may well define how diverse individual insight is gained should the principle be proven, the capability built and operated.

Proof of Principle requires agreement between the interested federal agency and the partnership. The agreement required is on the level of funding, term of the Proof of Principle, and if successful, the anticipated level of implementation funding for the long term SET Test Capability. The sponsor and partnership must agree on what is, and what is not, a successful proof of concept. With agreement on how success is defined, an initial investment can be made to prove the concept. If unsuccessful, there is no further funding. If successful, long term funding for SET is provided.

A pre-initiative phase is proposed for the SET Test Capability. The pre-initiative phase would allow the core partnership to team with RSPA to define the scope, specific technical objectives and the extended research partnership for the SET Test Capability Proof of Principle. Extensive discussions with potential extended partners are planned in order to continue to seek appropriate liaisons to other Department of Transportation agencies, to other federal laboratories and universities, to private industry, and to the public as well as the transportation system managers responsible for decisions. Each extended partner is expected to facilitate continued development of the SET concept and the proposed Proof of Principle. The deliverable from this pre-initiative phase would be a negotiated Proof of Principle scope of work and milestones for the SET Test Capability.

A general discussion of the Proof of Principle is included in the main body of this paper. While the specific deliverables from the Proof of Principle efforts will be determined during the pre-initiative phase, the deliverables should emphasize both technical and programmatic success. Technical deliverables will demonstrate the developing transportation system simulation and modeling environment within a distributed computing system that support timely cost effective decisions. The Proof of Principle initiative will demonstrate application of the developing decision support tools to a specific, agreed upon transportation issue. The distributed computing system will be demonstrated through computing facilities at Sandia National Laboratories, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory and additional partner(s) as appropriate. A second major deliverable will emphasize programmatic challenges and successes through a report on the institutional issues and opportunities associated with public and private participation in the SET Test Capability’s development of products, services and decision support tools.

Continuation of the SET Test Capability past the Proof of Principle phase will clearly depend upon the successful completion of the negotiated Proof of Principle. It is proposed that a negotiated program plan including key long term technical objectives and milestones, investment strategy, and outreach efforts be included as a major output of the Proof of Principle.

A sense of responsibility for cost effective system performance and decisions can be addressed by regarding transportation as a system, but the present splintering of transportation interests presents a formidable implementation issue. Fragmentation will only be overcome if public, private and non-governmental organizations recognize the potential benefit from a systems approach so significantly outweighs potential cost that historic resistance, resentment and mistrust can be set aside.

A unique Systems Engineering for Transportation (SET) Test Capability has been proposed where a diverse set of expertise and institutes will combined their collective knowledge of the transportation system in a simulation and modeling environment that is grounded by system level collective field testing. The value of the proposed SET Test Capability extends to all transportation modes. Each mode has user, vehicle and infrastructure issues that may be assessed within such an environment. The value of the capability holds potential for research, providing an invaluable tool for assessing the system impact of proposed modal change.

It has been proposed that the SET Test Capability’s feasibility be demonstrated through a Proof of Principle demonstration. Because the proposed SET Test Capability is a system performance capability, the proposed Proof of Principle should be coordinated by the Research and Special Projects Administration. RSPA has responsibility for system level assessment and improvement of transportation. RSPA also helps integrate the work of critically important research partners in such an effort: federal laboratories and institutes of higher education. It is recommended that the specific focus of the Proof of Principle be cooperatively selected and the scope, level of funding and period agreed upon by RSPA and the proposed partnership.