By Jim Griffin – Chief Technology Officer, Fleet Advantage
Transportation and fleet managers have wrestled for years with the cost versus benefit of incorporating telematics on their trucks. The term telematics derives from the combination of telecommunications and informatics and represents a variety of devices also known as onboard computer systems. Although telematics devices have been around for decades, the percentage of Class 8 tractors outfitted with them ranges between 27% and 40% — percentages that speak volumes about the perceived value of telematics.
Now that the electronic logging device, or ELD, mandate is being placed into law, fleet managers who have yet to incorporate telematics are being forced to make an important initial decision: Do I view the telematics mandate as a “necessary evil” and spend the least amount to meet compliance, or do I go “all in” and realize the value of the data that it provides?
Amid the overload of applications, hardware and services available in the everchanging telematics world, deciding on the range of system functionality and associated costs can be overwhelming. This can be especially true for fleet managers who have not yet immersed themselves in telematics research — and I can say with confidence that a lot of research must precede a decision. Pricing for hardware can range from free to several thousand dollars, while functionality can range from basic GPS tracking to a fully integrated, mobileasset management system. The new mandate will be a key factor in the decision of which system to choose. With options on vendors, applications, features and costs, where do you start?
First, you need to recognize that decision time has come, and you must take action to be compliant. Factors that must enter into this decision equation include hardware pricing of the newly available and enhanced data sets you will need and financing options. Thinking strategically about the data you need to manage your fleet’s performance, your drivers’ behavior and vehicle life cycle options ultimately will pay off in improved fuel economy, lower operating costs and improved driver retention. So a thorough and methodical due diligence approach is recommended.
So now what?
Now that you know that a decision is imminent, what do you do? If you are a fleet manager venturing into the telematics landscape for the first time, you need to understand that this is a journey for your organization, as the data and reporting options available to fleet managers can be as overwhelming as choosing the best service provider. It is an onerous task to simply digest the tidal wave of functionality and data that will be available. So you need to establish and prioritize your needs to understand the telematics value proposition.
Second, you need to choose a provider or partner that is there for the long haul, that has the ability to support your organization and your fleet well into the future. A shortsighted decision to simply meet the ELD mandate without understanding the “actionable data potential” for greatly reducing operating costs is illadvised. Since you must make the investment per the ELD mandate, the incremental costs to acquire systems and services that provide additional data and applications to modernize your fleet are minimal and the return on investment is substantial.
By attempting to minimize your initial step into telematics too much, you will find that, in the long run, you will have lost substantial operational savings and actually increased your costs by not having access to decisionmaking data that can assist in optimizing your fleet’s performance and safety. For example, at Fleet Advantage, we have found that by using the right data to monitor only fuel economy, a tractor’s performance can be increased by 5% to 12% on average and more in some cases. That can be thousands of dollars of savings per year for each tractor.
Is it more than just the technology?
The selection of your telematics product and partner goes beyond the technology. Let’s be clear, these systems are much more complicated than they get credit for. These systems are inherently challenging and, because no two fleets operate the same, there will be additional challenges. Your technology selections need to be determined by answering these important questions:
- Is the technology limited to meeting only my current needs to be compliant with the ELD mandate?
- Does the technology allow for easy access to reliable applications and reports that can provide actionable information for improving my fleet’s operating performance and safety?
- Does the technology provide a growth path to leverage the value of predictive and descriptive diagnostics? Many providers will tell you they are providing it today. However, this is an emerging area that no doubt is in its infancy and will continue to evolve. Don’t get left behind by choosing a limited technology partner.
- Does the provider have the resources, understanding and cultural climate to navigate this journey with your organization and be a true partner?
Although the thought of implementing the new ELD mandate and a telematics solution can appear to be overwhelming, the benefits of doing so will be well worth the investment of cost, time and effort.
Fleet Advantage is a leading innovator in truck fleet business analytics, equipment financing and life cycle cost management. For more information, visit www.FleetAdvantage.net
The United State Post Office is rolling out the Dynamic Routing Optimization (DRO) contracts in select cities in the US. The DRO contracts are cost-saving measures designed to minimize the total mileage and equipment requirements for the area-wide deliveries to postal facilities.
LoadTrek is currently involved with the DRO project in Dulles, VA, and through this project, we have refined our understanding of DRO contracts. In this post, we discuss our insights and important implementation details to consider in executing DRO contracts.
Read the entire article here……
Source: The Modern Maintenance Manager: Managing Today’s Technicians
Source: Todd Bryant
Trucking is undoubtedly one of the most heavily regulated industries in the United States. The past few years have been especially turbulent with the adoption of the 2012 highway bill, the cost increase of freight broker bonds and the controversial hours of service rule, among others.
This year is going to be no exception. Several important laws and regulations have been announced and are awaiting their implementation, affecting motor carriers and freight brokers alike. Let’s look at them in more detail to see what shape trucking industry trends will take in 2016.
#1. Тhe Unified Registration System Will be Implemented
Phase one of the roll-out of the URS already began late last year, and phase two is scheduled for September 30th. It will affect all motor carriers, freight brokers and other entities currently registered with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.
The URS will do away with all registration numbers currently in use, such as the MC, MX and the FF, and replace them with the USDOT numbering system in one comprehensive database. This is predicted to save time and money for the industry, thanks to reduced paperwork and processing times. It will also make it easier for FMCSA to track down high-risk small and mid-sized carriers trying to evade enforcement action.
#2. New Safety Fitness Rule Proposed by the FMCSA
In January, FMCSA proposed a new rulemaking that aims to make it easier to evaluate safety fitness of motor carriers and identify non-compliance.
The proposed Safety Fitness Determination rule will introduce a new safety ranking “by integrating on-road safety data from inspections, along with the results of carrier investigations and crash reports, to determine a motor carrier’s overall safety fitness on a monthly basis.” The currently used model has three levels: satisfactory, conditional, unsatisfactory. The new rule will replace it in favor of an “unfit” score, meaning that a motor carrier would have to take immediate action and improve its rating or discontinue operation.
#3. Driver Coercion Mandate Has Just Begun
FMCSA has been working on a coercion mandate, which is finally taking effect this year. It aims to prevent fleet owners from harassing their drivers, but the rule also applies to freight brokers and shippers.
FMCSA defines driver coercion as an action occurring when motor carriers, shippers or freight brokers “take employment action against, or punish a driver for refusing to operate in violation of certain provisions” of regulatory authorities. Drivers are now able to file complaints with FMCSA within a 90-day period of when the coercion occurred.
#4. More Training Required for New Drivers
For much of the past two years, there has been talk of updating training requirements for entry-level drivers. At the end of last year, the proposal moved into the Office of Management and Budget for approval, which is the last step before it gets published in the Federal Register.
The new requirements are not yet publicly available but are expected to be published this year. The publication will be followed by the customary period for public comment. Some of the details known so far are that Class A drivers will be required a minimum of 30 hours behind the wheel, while Class B drivers will need 15. Many trucking groups, however, disagree with the minimum hours rule on the basis that there is no statistical evidence to back it up. In addition to that, the Entry Level Driver Training Advisory Committee has compiled a 10-page curriculum of performance-based requirements every new driver must fulfill.
#5. Speed Limiters Installed on Heavy Trucks
This is an issue FMCSA has been trying to tackle for several years, and progress has been slow. In the middle of last year, the administration postponed setting a deadline for implementation once again, but 2016 may be the year it finally happens.
The rule is simple: FMCSA wants carriers to install speed limiters on heavy trucks (defined as vehicles with a GVWR of 26,000 pounds or more) in an effort to reduce the number of fatal crashes. According to the administration, the measure will not prove be costly, as most of these trucks already have speed limiters installed but have not set limiting parameters.
#6. A CDL Testing Database to be Established
In the first half of 2016, we are expecting to see the publication of the final rule of the drug and alcohol testing clearinghouse, a requirement of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century highway funding act.
When implemented, the rule will establish a database of drivers who have refused to submit to or have failed a drug and alcohol test. Carriers will be required to query the database before hiring a new driver. They would also have to report all incidents in which one of their drivers was cited for driving under the influence.
01/29/16 by Egor Korneev.
Running under different HOS profiles in each fleet segment is straightforward. However, if companies use the same drivers, on the same days, to run under two different HOS rulesets, the complexity quickly rises. The possibility of unexpected Hours of Services violations escalates.
Read the full article here…..
When is it a good idea to use multiple profiles?
What are the common problems when switching profiles?
Impact of Electronic Logging Devices
Best practices from our customers
02/05/16 by Egor Korneev.
Route Tracking – best approach to automatic arrival?
LoadTrek has recently expanded the automated route stop arrival and departure tracking to include both the location radius and the geofence of the location. Why retain both options? Which one is better for you? Let’s begin with a discussion of each methodology and the primary working principles behind each.
Location radius is a circle, typically 0.4 miles, around the location geocode. The on-board computer registers the arrival event when the vehicle enters the location radius and stops for a period of a few seconds.
The dispatching software automatically creates a default radius for a location with a valid address. This is a big advantage in a busy dispatching office. It saves time. The disadvantage of the location radius is the lack of precision in describing the actual boundaries of the facility.
Geofences are multi-vector polygons which users can precisely shape to a customer’s facility. An arrival to a route stop is recorded as soon as the vehicle crosses the boundary of the geofence. Unlike the location radius, the vehicle does not have to stop for the arrival to occur.
A dispatcher must build the geofence with clicks on the map, placing points around the boundaries of a location. Then, the geofence is sent to the devices in vehicles. The process to replace the default radius with a geofence is simple and takes only an extra minute. Yet, even that amount of extra time can be a significant disadvantage in a busy dispatching office.
What approach to use?
On the surface, each approach accomplishes the same task, creating an automatic arrival record when a vehicle enters a facility. Location radius is generated by the software. Geofences require extra setup by the user. When is the extra work justified? Let’s consider a case.
A large facility is located in an urban area. The location radius must remain relatively large to include the entire facility. As a result, the radius extends outside the boundaries of the facility and includes neighboring roads. A vehicle approaches a facility on a road that wraps the perimeter of the facility. The vehicle stops at a traffic signal and the arrival event is recorded, but the vehicle has another few minutes of driving remaining, and there is a line at the security gate. The vehicle enters the facility fifteen minutes after the arrival time was first recorded.
If the precision of the arrival times is important to your operation, then this is a good case for creating a geofence. We advocate using geofences for arrivals in all cases. They offer additional reporting capabilities that location radius lack, such as geofence-specific speed limits, inclusion or exclusion zone indicators, alerts on arrivals. However, If you run a very busy dispatch operation with multiple new pickup and delivery locations each day, then the simplicity of the location radius could be a good choice.
A company can use both approaches simultaneously, for different locations. If one location has a defined geofence, then the on-board computer will use it for arrivals and departures. If another location does not have a geofence, then the system will automatically fall back on the location radius for the route progress tracking.
In the later posts, we will discuss the Vicinity Arrival Reports that compare arrivals into location radiuses and location geofences. These reports can help you troubleshoot locations that require extended time to enter and cause non-compliance with the shippers’ schedules. Stay tuned.
Check out LoadTrek webinar calendar. We regularly hold webinars on new features and software functionality.
Webinar Calendar
Written by: Egor Korneev
Edited by: Dushan Yovovich
To Comment: http://www.loadtrek.net/route-tracking-radius-geofence/
