 |
|
|
|
U.S. Department of Transportation
Office of the Secretary
of Transportation
DTRT57-06-R-SBIR
DOT Program Solicitation for
Small
Business Innovation Research
Technical Questions and Answers (Updated 04/21/06)
Program Contents
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
06-FH1 Real Time Signal State Transition Software for Advanced Traffic Controller
Question 1: Is Ada absolutely required?
Answer: The offeror can show an alternative route to validating the performance of the implemented logic in a human life safety critical manner other then parallel execution of Ada and C code with a hardware in the loop interface. However, The GNAT Ada compiler is openly available. There are commercial Ada compilers specifically designed for safety critical code testing. And, Ada is closely related to the Pascal language and there are on line tutorials. Question 2: Do I have to implement all of the Signal Transition Logic?
Answer: The solicitation says that 'The offeror should focus the project on elements of the STL he feels will produce the most useful product and practical demonstration of its benefits such as railroad preemption." This means that the offeror must use his or her discretion to structure the project in a manner most likely to lead to a successful product. Trying to achieve the perfect is frequently the worst enemy of achieving the good. The offerer needs to determine what is doable within the resources of the project, justify the choices and propose a practical route to achieving success. Question 3: Which open source license should I use?
Answer: That is up to the offeror. One route is the BSD license that allows making commercial products with the open source BSD code. An example of this is the kernel of the Apple Operating System. However, other vendors use a dual licensing scheme whereby they develop one fully open source product and one commercial product from their original code base. There are a variety of open source licenses and approaches which can be utilized. Question 4: Where do I get more information on the Advanced Transportation Controller (ATC)?
Answer: See the ATC standards committee website and the signal controller manufacturers' web sites. Question 5: Where do I get more information on the uCLinux for the ATC?
Answer: Information on uCLinux is available on the web. Information on standards for Linux for the ATC is available from the ATC standards committee web site. Question 6: Where do I get more information on NCHRP 3-66 Signal Transition Logic?
Answer: See the Transportation Research Board website at http://www4.trb.org/trb/crp.nsf/All+Projects/NCHRP+3-66
Note that it may be easier to do a google search on NCHRP 3-66 interim results
The site states that:
Product Availability: The interim report is available for loan from the NCHRP.
The interim results are also available from the TRB Signal Systems Committee Web Site at: http://www.signalsystems.org.vt.edu/documents.html
Question 7: Why is the US DOT doing this project?
Answer: We are interested in developing safety critical intersection control systems to reduce the number of accidents occurring at intersections. Collision avoidance systems and red light running reduction systems depend on a detailed awareness of the emergency vehicles, railroad vehicle, and other vehicles flowing through the intersection and their real priorities. This information is not currently available. We wish small businesses to exercise their creativity and practicality in coming up with an approach which will lead to a commercial product which will be used in the signal control industry. Question 8: Isn't this project set aside for the University of Tennessee?
Answer: No. The University of Tennessee is not eligible to bid. They are a university not a small business. They and their consultants are eligible to be sub contractors to small businesses. However, if you choose to do pursue this, you are bound by the rules regarding sub contracting under the SBIR program.
- Question 9: You stated that "This project requires significant experience in traffic engineering, real time control, Linux and programming of traffic signal controllers." Do you really mean that experience in programming traffic signal controllers is needed?
Answer: Yes, experience in programming traffic signal controllers is required. We require this for two reasons. First, Traffic signal controllers are safety critical systems. Second, Experience in safety critical systems is important for a credible product.
Question 10: You reference a " real time Linux ATC operating system for the Advanced Transportation Controller (ATC) "; can you please clarify where a source of this ATC realtime o/s can be found? Or are you referring to any linux realtime o/s???
Answer: Real Time Linux for the Advanced Transportation Controller will be available from Ed Fok of the FHWA Resource Center to the successful bidder. It is based on RTAI Linux and the Embedded Linux Consortium standards. It is specific to the ATC and no other Linux distribution will be appropriate. It is being developed by Precision Traffic Systems of Austin, Texas. Question 11: Phase I would develop and demonstrate prototype software embodying a simplified version of the STL and demonstrate its use with an open source TSCP. " Can you please clarify the open source TSCP's and their sources to which you are referring to?
Answer: The Traffic Signal Control Program was developed by the City of Los Angeles. If the City of Los Angeles does not provide an open source version, it is up to the bidder to propose alternative approaches to developing an open source and a closed source product under this project. Question 12: You say in the solicitation "Similar Proposals or Awards. Warning - while it is permissible, with proposal notification, to submit identical proposals or proposals containing a significant amount of essentially equivalent work for consideration under numerous Federal program solicitations, it is unlawful to enter into contracts or grants requiring essentially equivalent effort. If there is any question concerning this, it must be disclosed to the soliciting agency or agencies before award." Does this mean that I may not bid if I am doing related work for other agencies?
Answer: No, it means that you must disclose the work and show that it is not essentially equivalent effort and that you are not being paid twice to do the same work. Full disclosure will prevent problems from occurring. See also section III item 4 in the solicitation instructions which reads: "4. Related Research or R&D. Describe significant R/R&D that is directly related to the proposal including any conducted by the project manager/principal investigator or by the proposing firm. Describe how it relates to the proposed effort, and any planned coordination with outside sources. The proposer must persuade reviewers of his or her awareness of key recent R/R&D conducted by others in the specific topic area." Question 13: We have no experience in traffic signal controllers. We do have a great deal of experience in real-time flight control (fly-by-wire large commercial passenger planes) and other redundant software systems. Is this enough experience in safety critical software? We're also currently writing missile guidance software where if we were to make a mistake, bad things would happen. Also very safety critical.
Answer: No. Experience with traffic signal controllers is required. Our previous experience with Defense and Aerospace contractors has taught us that the street environment is much dirtier, more cluttered, less reliable and subject to vandalism then the defense and aerospace environments.
06-FH2 NDE Testing of Pavements for Location and Evaluation of In-roadway Sensor Installations
Question 1: Are there additional technical information available for the in-roadway vehicle sensors?
Answer: Yes. Do an internet search on inductive loop detector sensor, magnetometer, in-pavement sensor, or intrusive sensor. Also, the Traffic Detector Handbook at
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tfhrc/safety/pubs/Ip90002/intro.htm Question 2: Has the FHWA worked with anyone in the past regarding the problem outlined in the solicitation?
Answer: FHWA has worked in the past with a wide variety of contractors regarding non destructive evaluation. I would suggest an internet search on the terms "NDE testing pavements fhwa". Mine produced 611 hits. Question 3: What type of sensors are currently installed in pavements and roadways?
Answer: See answer to Question 1. Question 4: Are these specific NDE technology that DOT has preference over? For example, using lasers.
Answer: The solicitation specifies the characteristics that the NDE method measure. "The system needs to detect and locate loop sealant and 14-gauge loop wire within 8 inches of pavement surface." Not the technology used to measure these characteristics. It is up to the proposer to explain and justify the technology used in the context of the solicitation requirements. Question 5: Does the topic allow for new technology to be used as sensors that would make their testing and evaluating more effective than present methods?
Answer: No. The purpose is not to develop new in roadway sensors. The purpose, as cited in the solicitation is to "locate, categorize and evaluate the installation of in roadway sensors and nearby rebar, pipes and other pavement infrastructure." Question 6: Are there additional technical information available for the in-roadway vehicle sensors?
Answer: Yes. Do an internet search on inductive loop detector sensor, magnetometer, in-pavement sensor, or intrusive sensor. Also, the Traffic Detector Handbook at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tfhrc/safety/pubs/Ip90002/intro.htm Question 7: Has the FHWA worked with anyone in the past regarding the problem outlined in the solicitation?
Answer: FHWA has worked in the past with a wide variety of contractors regarding non-destructive evaluation. I would suggest an internet search on the terms "NDE testing pavements fhwa". Mine produced 611 hits. Question 8: What type of sensors are currently installed in pavements and roadways?
Answer: Yes. Do an internet search on inductive loop detector sensor, magnetometer, in-pavement sensor, or intrusive sensor. Also, the Traffic Detector Handbook at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tfhrc/safety/pubs/Ip90002/intro.htm Question 9: Are these specific NDE technology that DOT has preference over? For example, using lasers.
Answer: The solicitation specifies the characteristics that the NDE method measure. "The system needs to detect and locate loop sealant and 14-gauge loop wire within 8 inches of pavement surface." Not the technology used to measure these characteristics. It is up to the proposer to explain and justify the technology used in the context of the solicitation requirements. Question 10: Does the topic allow for new technology to be used as sensors that would make their testing and evaluating more effective than present methods?
Answer: No. The purpose is not to develop new in roadway sensors. The purpose, as cited in the solicitation is to "locate, categorize and evaluate the installation of in roadway sensors and nearby rebar, pipes and other pavement infrastructure." Question 11: Part of the requirement for 06-FH2 NDE Testing of Pavements for Location and Evaluation of In-roadway Sensors Installations solicitation is to collect data on at least one working and one non-working site. Will the DOT direct which sites these will be or will we need to identify our own testing sites? If we are responsible for locating test sites will there be any criteria set by the DOT SBIR office defining what is a "working" and what is a "non-working" in roadway sensor? Is a site with partial failure good or is complete failure needed?
Answer: To minimize expenditure of funds for travel, a site should be located in conjunction with the state or city near the contractor. The maintenance staff in the transportation department should be able to help identify sites with both working and non-working loops and/or magnetometers where they feel that installation in the pavement or other pavement issues are contributing to the failure. Question 12: The solicitation is focused on in-road induction-loop type sensors, although it doesn't explicitly state this. Another common used in-road sensor is the pressure sensitive PZT type. Would NDE of these types of sensors be of interest too?
Answer: Loops and magnetometers have lead in wires, which can be tested by non-destructive evaluation (NDE). Similarly, the installation of the square, circle or rectangle of loop wire, which serves as the sensing element, and installation the magnetometer can be tested by NDE. During phase 2, application of the sensing technology to pressure sensitive sensors can be explored. Question 13: You say in the solicitation "Similar Proposals or Awards. Warning - while it is permissible, with proposal notification, to submit identical proposals or proposals containing a significant amount of essentially equivalent work for consideration under numerous Federal program solicitations, it is unlawful to enter into contracts or grants requiring essentially equivalent effort. If there is any question concerning this, it must be disclosed to the soliciting agency or agencies before award." Does this mean that I may not bid if I am doing related work for other agencies?
Answer: No, it means that you must disclose the work and show that it is not essentially equivalent effort and that you are not being paid twice to do the same work. Full disclosure will prevent problems from occurring. See also section III item 4 in the solicitation instructions which reads: "4. Related Research or R&D. Describe significant R/R&D that is directly related to the proposal including any conducted by the project manager/principal investigator or by the proposing firm. Describe how it relates to the proposed effort, and any planned coordination with outside sources. The proposer must persuade reviewers of his or her awareness of key recent R/R&D conducted by others in the specific topic area." Question 14: In paragraph one, a malfunction rate of 5% to 50% is stated. Is there a source of information, reports, articles, etc. that provides information on these failure rates as a function of type of sensor, function of sensor, probable cause of failures ?
Answer: TRB and other transportation research centers provide much information on traffic research. The PATH research database contains numerous research studies as does TRIS on line and the Texas Transportation Institute Question 15: What are the shortcuts taken during installation that may cause failures?
Answer: Failure to perform one or more of the steps described in the installation procedures in the Traffic Detector Handbook. Question 16: In paragraph two, are test specimens containing operating and defective sensors available for use at a DOT site or shipment to an outside laboratory for evaluation of the NDE systems? If so, what is the size and weight of the specimen.
Answer: No, samples are not available. Question 17: In paragraph two, the NDE system needs to detect and locate loop "sealant" and 14-gauge loop wire within inches of pavement. Please describe or furnish a source that describes the size material, configuration and typical location of "sealant" and loop wire.
Answer: See the Traffic Detector Handbook cited above. Question 18: In paragraph six. Explain or provide a source for the term 'Intersection Collision Avoidance"
Answer: Google Question 19: "GPR is not typically used for fine gain analysis." Please explain.
Answer: In order for measurements to be made over long stretches of highway, it is generally typical for measurements to be made from a moving vehicle. This makes the problem more difficult to solve. If you have a solution, then by all means, propose it. Question 20: Has any prior work been conducted on NDE per the above or similar application. Source ?
Answer: Tris on line at http://trisonline.bts.gov/list_results.cfm?RECCOUNTER=1&CFID=3291559&Camp;FTOKEN=74053346 shows 6 hits for NDE and pavement and 21 hits for NONDESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION AND PAVEMENT and 174 hits for nondestructive evaluation. Google has 37,700 hits for NDE and pavement. Question 21: What constitutes a "strawman model", is it a conceptual drawing of the system ?
Answer: The STRAWMAN, WOODENMAN, TINMAN, IRONMAN, STEELMAN models were successively more rigorous models of what the ADA language should look like. A strawman model is the early conceptual stage of a mathematical or logical model of how a system should perform. Question 22: What version of MathCad is accepted and is MathCad the only acceptable CAD program that can be used ?
Answer: Any recent version is acceptable provided that one legal licensed copy of the version used with all related libraries is delivered to the COTR for permanent government use in testing, evaluating utilizing the products. It is noted that MathCad is not a CAD program but is a program for designing and executing mathematical and logical constructs such as signal processing. Question 23: Per the solicitation: "The prototype technique shall be used to collect data on at least one working and one non-working in roadway sensor." Does this imply a prototype system will be developed for phase I? Where will this test take place, and should travel cost be included in the phase I?
Answer: The bidder may propose using an existing system during phase I as a "working prototype" which will be extended during phase 2 or may develop a new prototype during phase I. In either case, it is up to the bidder to explain why the approach chosen was taken. The bidder should determine what they consider the best approach for doing the data collection work. Question 24: Per the solicitation: "Familiarity with traffic engineering software would also be useful, as the outputs will be used by traffic engineers to verify compliance." What particular traffic engineering SW tools are you interested in?
Answer: See the McTrans software center for examples of typical tools used by transportation engineers. Question 25: Is ground penetrating radar (GPR) deemed to be the NDE method of choice for this effort or are other sensing modalities (such as ultrasonics, eddy current, gamma rays) within scope and of potential relevance?
Answer: The solicitation specifies the characteristics that the NDE method measure. "The system needs to detect and locate loop sealant and 14-gauge loop wire within 8 inches of pavement surface." Not the technology used to measure these characteristics. It is up to the proposer to explain and justify the technology used in the context of the solicitation requirements. Question 26: Can a description or references to a description of in-roadway sensors including composition, geometry, and structure be provided?
Answer: Yes. Do an internet search on inductive loop detector sensor, magnetometer, in-pavement sensor, or intrusive sensor. Also, the Traffic Detector Handbook at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tfhrc/safety/pubs/Ip90002/intro.htm Question 27: Can a description or references to a description of representative defective in-roadway sensor installations be provided?
Answer: TRB and other transportation research centers provide much information on traffic research. The PATH research database contains numerous research studies as does TRIS on line and the Texas Transportation Institute
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)
06-PH1 Innovative Safety, Reliability and Inspection Technologies for Pipeline System Integrity Management
Question 1: What are the issues with current technologies for evaluating pipeline coatings? Is pipeline intrusion detection an issue that the DOT would be interested in? We are currently developing a technology that would help in pipeline security.
Answer: We want the applicant to identify the technology gap and then explain how their approach fills that technology gap. That requires knowledge of pipeline infrastructure issues and some bases for filling the gaps. Question 2: In the description of the topic emphasis was put on inspection tools to ascertain damage to pipelines. Is there interest in looking at "low cost methods to prevent 3rd party damage?
Answer: We are not focusing this topic on 3rd party damage prevention. We are interested in only the following technologies or tools:
- Coating disbondment inspection tools.
- Cost effective technologies for pipeline coating assessment and fingerprinting. Various type of coating materials are used on pipelines. Which include new inspection techniques or technologies for accurate coating condition assessment provide information that could be compared to its original manufacture specifications.
- Innovative technologies with cost effective solutions that improve current None Destructive Evaluation (NDE) capabilities. For various types of nonmetallic pipelines. Anticipated results would provide quantifiable, cost effective and or reliable improvements over existing technology towards NDE of nonmetallic pipelines.
Question 3: What physical or chemical properties of nonmetallic pipelines need to be evaluated under this circumstance?
Answer: The applicant must identify what specific chemical or physical properties they will use in their NDE approach to determine safety, integrity and reliability of various types of nonmetallic pipelines. The applicant also needs to discuss why their approach is both cost effective and commercially viable while solving specific technical barriers with existing NDE technologies. Question 4: What are current NDE technologies excluding mentioned new and emerging technologies, such as laser based ultrasonic testing, thermal imaging, hyper-spectral inspection, internal capacitive tomography?
Answer: The Pipeline Safety R&D Program is interested in new or emerging NDE technologies that are under development or even commercially available to different industries that show promise to demonstrate the potential usage in the pipeline industry for various types of nonmetallic pipelines. Question 5: Can we propose a leak detection system under this section of this topic vs. coating assessments under the prior two sections?
Answer: Yes, keep in mind the application needs to describe how the approach shows promise towards filling the DA requirements for non-metallic pipelines. Question 6: Is there a specific type of non-metallic pipeline being considered?
Answer: The pipe material must be an approved material for transporting both natural gas and hazardous liquids.
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)
06-FR3 Ultra Portable Ride Quality Meter
Question 1: It appears that devices are available that moderately match the requirements of this specification. Specifically, the device produced by ENSCO, I believe under a government funding arrangement, is a portable ride quality meter that connects to a laptop computer and is marketed for railroad assessment. I deduce from the wording of the solicitation that the existing device, while portable, is not ultra-portable, has an inconvenient power supply, and doesn't provide the desired mapping functionality. Are there any other drawbacks of this device that were not specifically noted in the solicitation but which the DOT would like addressed in the solicitation response?
Answer: The requirements are for an ultra portable and compact device that integrates acceleration sensors with signal conditioning and GPS receiver circuitry. The only connection to this device will be a USB cable for connection to a laptop to provide for the flow of data and control parameters as well as for providing power. Question 2: Does the FRA currently employ a specific mapping software package for ride quality assessment? If so, is it desired that this new technology utilize the same mapping software? If not fully-utilized, must the new technology be backwards-compatible with the previous mapping software?
Answer: No to both parts Question 3: Does current ride quality data exist in electronic format within FRA's archives? If so, in what data format? Is it expected that the new technology will be able to import and utilize the existing data for historical analysis?
Answer: Yes and is in binary format. No to the latter part. Question 4: When there is no a clear line of sight for the NDGPS (i.e. in a tunnel) will the system need to provide a different way to determine its location?
Answer: No. Question 5: What is the maximum acceleration load (Max vibration, jerk, etc.) we can expect?
Answer: Typical in railroad environment, FRA gave some estimates in previous answers but contractor should research the expected environment. Question 6: Is there any need to have a battery backup for the system?
Answer: No Question 7: What is the typical test duration for the device?
Answer: As long as power and storage is available, system should be able to record. User can start, and stop at will from connected laptop. Question 8: What product is FRA currently using for its ride-quality measurements and what aspects are you looking to improve upon?
Answer: FRA is using an ultra portable system now that is off-the-shelf and has all needed features with the exception of GPS integration. Question 9: The topic description did not list deliverable requirements for the Phases I, II, and III. What is FRA expecting out of a Phase I?
Answer: FRA expects a functioning prototype out of Phase I. Question 10: Does the DoT eventually wish to purchase RQM's from the winning contractor?
If so, how many units, at what yearly rate, over what period of time?
Is there a known total quantity?
Answer: Yes. Up to 50 units but not less than 20. Perhaps 10 per year over 2 to 5 years. Question 11: What would the DoT expect to pay for a RQM?
Answer: This will depend on the quality and performance of the developed prototypes, but FRA has purchased RQMs of lesser functionality for around $3000 per unit Question 12: What are the expected output results of the FR3 Phase I research?
What are the specific project deliverables (i.e. a research report, a prototype unit, a plan for moving the design into 'production' form, etc. Any detail is appreciated.)?
Answer: A prototype that meets all of FRA's requirements including all of the above. Question 13: Do you see the RQM as a low-cost and minimal feature-set device, or as full functionality?
For example if a full-color Display were implemented in the RQM, because of the integrated GPS the RQM could dynamically display the current position with local features and landmarks. If it was necessary to minimize RQM cost / functionality, this capability could be omitted or possibly displayed on an accompanying Laptop PC. Increasing its capabilities would make it more useful, but would also add more cost.
Answer: The latter is correct. All display and data manipulation should be designed as such that they can be made via software on the to-be-attached operating laptop (the lap top is not part of the deliverable). The RQM unit itself need not have any displays of its own. Question 14: (System Requirement questions)
Based on the RQM description, the following features / capabilities appear to be required for the RQM:
- Data Logging
- Logging of Ride Quality vs. Location of Occurrence
- USB PC Interface
- Display Interface
Answer: Yes. Question 15: Would you agree with the above list, or are there any errors as shown?
Answer: No errors. Question 16: What other features have we missed that would be considered required?
What other features would be considered desirable?
Answer: All power through the USB interface.
Customizable software to allow for data collection and real-time display on a laptop Question 17: What vibrational sensitivity / accuracy is necessary?
What positional accuracy (ride quality vs. location monitored) is necessary?
Answer: Contractor should propose based on typical railroad ride environment Question 18: Would it be desirable for the RQM to operate and gather data independent of the Laptop?
For example, to be able to easily carry the RQM into different cars / compartments, take measurements and once all data was collected, download the data into the Laptop.
Answer: No. Question 19: Assuming the above feature is attractive, what amount of Data Logging capacity do you think would be necessary / desirable?
How long would the RQM be used to gather data before it would be downloaded into a PC?
Answer: All data collection will be done via the laptop using laptop hard disk Question 20: How do you envision the device being used / applied on the train (i.e. would it be desirable to be operated via table-top)?
Answer: Used only with a laptop Question 21: Will the device be used for monitoring ride quality for human cargo, or also for freight?
Answer: Both Question 22: Would it be desirable if the unit monitored not only Rail ride quality, but also end-to-end freight ride quality (i.e. the device could be included with the freight in its packaging, and monitor the ride quality through the entire transportation process)?
Answer: Monitoring any ride quality environment Question 23: Who would be operating the RQM and what are their skills /technical ability?
Answer: Engineers, technicians and field inspectors. Minimum high school education can be assumed. Question 24: What would be the major use / purpose of the RQM? Would it be used to locate bad sections of track, and localize areas of rail that most needed repair?
Answer: Both track and vehicle conditions will be assessed Question 25: Would it be valuable if the device could also be semi-permanently embedded on a train, and constantly monitor ride quality as the train traveled around the country?
For example the unit could periodically report on ride quality via wireless connection over 1 day, 1 week, or 1 month periods.
Answer: Not required but can be a desirable added feature Question 26: Roughly what size do you envision the RQM (i.e. it needs to fit into a shirt pocket, or fit comfortably into a brief case)? Is there some flexibility in these dimensions?
Answer: The smaller the better. FRA already uses devices which are less functional but have the size of a portable organizer Question 27: Are there any other interfaces besides USB (RS232, RS485, Ethernet, RS170, VGA, S-Video, etc.)?
Answer: No Question 28: Will the RQM periodically function in the open air or mainly within train compartments?
Answer: Both Question 29: What, if any, are the mounting requirements for the GPS receiver and the NDGPS beacon receiver?
Answer: FRA prefers sensors with flat metal base where a double adhesive tape can be applied. Holes for mounting screws can be provided, but it will be up to FRA to decide on how it wishes to deploy them. In current practice, the double adhesive tape works best and quickest in most applications. Please note that the acceleration sensors can be separate from the signal conditioning/GPS box but connected through an extension cable. Therefore, the double adhesive tape can be only applied to the relatively compact sensors. Tri-axial accelerometers sensors are again readily available in a single very compact configuration. Question 30: Where would the system be located during a test? Tabletop, floor, a person's lap, or seat? Are there any mounting requirements or restrictions.
Answer: Typically sensor will be placed on floor but should allow placement elsewhere such as tabletop. Question 31: Are wireless technologies with batteries acceptable (such as Bluetooth), or is laptop power a requirement?
Answer: Wireless connection will be a plus as long as it is not a substitute for a hardwired connection to a laptop. Question 32: Is there a per-unit cost envisioned?
Answer: Not specific cost per unit has been envisioned but cost per unit will be a limiting criterion if FRA moves to later phases of developing multiple prototypes.
06-FR5 Collision Survival System (CSS)
Question 1: We are interested in responding to topic 06-FR5. Per standard procedure, our technical staff must have upper management's approval before initiating work on a formal proposal. Management is wondering if other candidate firms may have already developed one or more preliminary designs for the CSS?
Answer: There have been no preliminary designs of the Collision Survival System.
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
06-FM1 Driver Fatigue - Distraction Monitoring and Alerting Technology
Question 1: Is there an extended version of the requirements for this project available?
Answer: No, but any system must meet the functional requirements stated in the SBIR to be considered. Question 2: Would you also consider technologies not directly related to physiological tests?
Answer: In addition to physiology-based technologies, we will consider performance-based technologies if they can be shown to highly correlate with generally accepted measures of fatigue/drowsiness as described in the SBIR. Question 3: Will this project be part of the Intelligent Vehicle Initiative?
Answer: No, this is not associated with the IVI.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
