1 / 45

Satellite Navigation Head to Head Test

Satellite Navigation Head to Head Test. London, July/August 2013. Summary.

cutler
Télécharger la présentation

Satellite Navigation Head to Head Test

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Satellite NavigationHead to Head Test London, July/August 2013

  2. Summary • In a series of Head-to-Head journeys undertaken with live traffic devices from TomTom, Google, Garmin and CoPilot, the routes generated by Tom Tom delivered drivers to their destinations 5% quicker than the next quickest device i.e. 2 minutes quicker on a typical commuting journey of around 40 minutes

  3. Introduction • The new generation of satellite navigation devices and smartphone apps have the ability to link navigation to live traffic information, with the goal of avoiding delays and optimising journey times by routing around traffic problems • TomTom wished to compare the performance of its own traffic information supported satellite navigation device – the TomTom Go 500 with that of it’s competitors • A Head-to-Head Test was devised which tested the performance of 5 satellite navigation devices on the same journeys at the same times on the same days

  4. Introduction • The objective was to compare the performance of the satellite navigation devices in terms of: • Estimated Time of Arrival (ETA) vs Actual Time of Arrival (ATA) • Estimate Travel Distance (ETD) vs Actual Travel Distance (ATD) • Trip Duration • Trip Distance • Performance in traffic

  5. Introduction • 5 identical vehicles were be deployed (2013 Model Ford Fiesta), each manned by a driver and co-driver • Each vehicle had one satellite navigation device and one GPS tracking device installed • A series of 85 trips of differing lengths/durations was devised making a total of 425 individual journeys (5 devices x 85 trips) • All 5 vehicles took the same trip (same start and end point) at the same time (separated by 2 minutes) on the same day • The 2 minute separation was used to ensure that the drivers were following their navigation devices, not each other in convoy, as they made their journeys

  6. Introduction • Journeys were taken between 6.00 am and 9.30 am in the morning and 4.00 pm and 7.30 pm in the evening, these times were chosen as the busiest times for traffic in London. Although there is no ‘official’ rush hour, Transport For London’s peak fares are between 4.30 am and 9.30 am and there is other anecdotal evidence to suggest that the evening rush hour starts at 4.00pm • The GPS tracking devices tracked the exact location of each vehicle as they undertook each journey • Drivers followed the instructions given by the satellite navigation device, co-drivers kept a record of key data for each journey and traffic conditions

  7. Introduction Each satellite navigation device was set up in the same way: • Factory defaults • Quickest Route • Traffic alerts on (if available) • Speed camera alerts on (if available) • Speed limit alert on (if available) • Audio navigation on • Toll roads = Yes

  8. Introduction Our target average journey time was based on the ‘typical commute’ of 40 minutes, we achieved an average of 40m 24s across all journeys

  9. Devices All devices needed an internet link to collect live traffic information

  10. Teams and Devices 6 driving teams were used, the devices were rotated between the teams each day

  11. Journey Schedule The first morning trip started soon after 6.00am and the first evening trip soon after 4.00pm

  12. Typical Trip Schedule

  13. Trips by Team/Device

  14. Journey Start/End Points

  15. Overall Performance

  16. Average Trip Time On average, the TomTom GO 500 was faster than any other device Base: 85 trips

  17. Average Trip Time Team 4 were the slowest, over 2½ minutes slower than average Base: 85 trips

  18. Average Trip Time - weighted Even after reweighting the data to remove driver variation, the TomTom GO 500 was over 2 minutes quicker than Google and over 3 minutes quicker than Garmin 3598 and CoPilot Base: 85 trips

  19. Average Trip Time by Duration The TomTom GO 500 performed comparatively well on shorter trips and best overall on trips over 30 min Number of journeys: Under 30 minutes: 145 30-59 minutes: 216 Over 60 minutes: 64 Total: 425 Base: 85 trips

  20. Average Trip Time by Distance The TomTom GO 500 performed comparatively well on all lengths of trips, and best overall on those between 5 and 20 miles No. of journeys: Under 5 miles: 41 5-10 miles: 158 10-20 miles: 138 Over 20 miles: 88 Total: 425 Base: 85 trips

  21. Average Trip Time by Location No. of journeys: Inner to Inner: 15 Inner to Outer: 19 Outer to Inner: 22 Outer to Outer: 29 Base: 85 trips

  22. Trip Duration vs Trip Distance Base: 425 journeys

  23. Average Trip Distance On average, the Garmin 3597 travelled an extra mile compared to TomTom Base: All trips

  24. Average Trip Speed Even though the Garmin 3597 achieved the best average speed, it only had the 3rd best trip time as it routed over longer distances Base: All trips

  25. ETA Accuracy: ETA-Arrival Time 4 of the devices underestimated the trip time, the CoPilot was underestimating by almost 20% Overestimated Underestimated Base: All trips

  26. Distance Accuracy: Estimated-Actual Distance All devices underestimated the trip distance, the Garmin 3597 underestimated by almost 5% Underestimated Base: All trips

  27. Average difference between original ETA and ETA during trip Average ETA difference Garmin 3597 As trips got longer, the difference between the original ETA and the in-trip ETA increased; Garmin 3598 was the most accurate and Copilot the most inaccurate TomTom Google CoPilot Garmin 3598 Journey Time Rijn Vogelaar Base: All trips

  28. Traffic Conditions

  29. Weight of traffic Morning All journeys Evening Traffic was at its heaviest during the evenings Base: All trips

  30. Driving Conditions All journeys Driving conditions were almost perfect Base: All trips

  31. Satnav Performance

  32. Satnav Performance Garmin 3597 CoPilot TomTom Go 500 Garmin 3598 Google Dedicated PNDs performed more consistently Base: All trips

  33. Satnav Performance Garmin 3597 CoPilot Slow to recalculate routes Screen road layout not matching actual road priorities Showing congestion when none observed Not showing congestion when congestion observed Voice navigation problems, either absent or conflicting with screen Not redirecting around traffic congestion Made some routing choices which extended journey time TomTom Go 500 Lost connection, no traffic information Routed down one way/closed road Garmin 3598 Google Not alerting to traffic congestion Voice instruction lost or late Difficult to read roundabout turns Lost connection/screen frozen Confusing directions, turns and lanes not clear Not showing congestion when congestion observed Made some routing choices which extended journey time

  34. Exception Reporting Mostly queuing traffic observed but not shown on screen Numbers are the count of each traffic situation type when driving teams felt it necessary to report an exception Minimal reporting of ‘false positives’ Base: All exception reports for all trips

  35. ETA Reporting Numbers are the count of each traffic situation type, taken with the ETA every 3 minutes throughout the journey Lowest inaccuracy percentage Base: All ETA reports for all trips

  36. What did the team think?

  37. Which device did you like the best? Base: 11 team members Taking everything into account, which of the devices did you like the best? and the next best and so on?

  38. Which device did you like the best? TomTom Go 500 Big screen, sat in cradle nicely, tap in postcode numbers on same screen as letters. Good choice of voices and speaker sound. Very intuitive to use. Screen easy to see. Split screen feature very good. Information given in good time. Seamless transition from heavy traffic route to alternative route. It was really simple to use, easy to enter details and it would automatically look up the address as soon as you'd put in some simple details. Liked the traffic information icons, this was depicted by what looked like Red lava on the screen, it also have a bar down the right side that gave you indication of how many cars ahead you were behind in built up traffic areas. Base: 11 team members Just thinking about the TOMTOM, what did you like about it? Please give as many details as you can.

  39. Which device did you like the best? Garmin 3598 1. Map easy to follow 2. Traffic information was on point 3. Camera alerts were prompt 4. Spoken directions were clear Clear audible navigation and screen directions. Very easy-touch screen. Like the wide screen. Very simple menu navigation. Logical layout. This satnav was easy to use, generally gave lots of warning when coming up to turns. The split screen image was, once again, very useful and gave good alternatives when in heavy traffic. It was very intuitive to use. Taking a wrong turn the satnav was good to offer an alternative route, sometimes did take a little longer than one would hope. Base: 11 team members Just thinking about the Garmin 3598, what did you like about it? Please give as many details as you can.

  40. Which device performed best for…? TomTom ranked highest on all attributes Base: 11 team members

More Related