|
This thread is awesome, and it's proven to me that a few of the spots I've identified as badly designed on my commute are, in fact, poo poo. VICTORY. There's one spot that's a daily danger I haven't spotted yet though. Here's a quick view of it. At an intersection there are four lanes northbound: two turn left, two go straight onto an interstate on ramp. There's no barrier between the left turn lanes and the straight lanes, aside from a frequently ignored white line. What typically happens is that the left side lane going straight will back up for half a mile. People drive up the turn lanes and cut in, which backs it up even further. In fact, if you move a little south on that satellite view you can see it happening. People will also sit in the rightmost turn lane with their blinkers on waiting for a chance to cut in, backing those guys up too. The REAL danger, however, is that with shocking regularity people will drive straight out of that right side left turn lane onto the opposing shoulder, THEN try to merge. It turns into a dangerous game of chicken to see who's going to let them in. The off-the-top-of-my-head solution would be a low concrete barrier between lanes, with the curve at the end to prevent people from going straight out of that turn lane. My concern, if they had the balls to do so, would that it would increase the weaving at the spot where the barrier begins, to say nothing of the idiots who will not notice and try to jump it. Any ideas? Am I close to correct in my thinking or would that just make more of a mess?
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2010 20:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 11:34 |
|
|
So I dug up an old DOS game which I remember playing years ago. It's overly simplistic and the interface leaves much to be desired, so I'm getting started on a modern version of it. I'm basically thinking the general idea is the same - you have a predefined area of streets and the extent of what you can do is largely limited to setting signals and markings, possibly with a progression aspect where you might gradually build up funds to take on larger projects like widening arterials. Not exactly going for a realistic approach to gameplay. Maybe one day I'll expand it to a larger simcity-type game but for now I just want to make something fairly simple. So I'm starting on some isometric art assets and (after deciding on my pixel scales) started browsing the MUTCD for proper sizes of markings, because I'm a masochist like that. So: quote:02 The widths and patterns of longitudinal lines shall be as follows: quote:Guidance: quote:Guidance: But nothing on the space between double lines. Should I just eyeball it so it looks good enough or is there a hidden/unwritten guideline to the size of the gap? e: I accidentally left Gridlock running in the background while I typed this up and I think I've got a bit of a problem: 
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2010 21:45
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Has there even been research done on abandoning the whole concept of a set cycle altogether and dynamically altering the signals based on detected traffic? I'm not talking about just one signal sitting there listening to the inductor loops embedded at that intersection, I'm talking about tying a network of signals together with wifi and having them keep track of the number of cars entering and leaving each intersection and signaling in order to maximize traffic flow. Seems like a very neural-net sort of optimization problem. Yes, England and Australia both have coordination systems based on this sort of model. Getting ideal timings is good, but takes a lot of computing power; pretty good timings are much easier to get, and work nearly as well. Check out SCATS in Sydney (haha), and SCOOTS in the UK. I can't find a link for that one. Phanatic posted:There's one near me that pisses me off a *lot*. There's a busy intersection where you make a left onto the main road, you've got a lane with a permissive left turn lane. The cycle timing is such that if you make it through that lane after it's changed from green arrow to green, you end up at the red light at the next intersection down, which *isn't* busy, so there's no cross traffic anymore, but you still get to sit there for a couple of minutes of red while nobody approaches. And it has to do that, because if it stayed green traffic coming up the main road to the busy intersection would back up to and through the non-busy intersection. There's got to be some way to make those lights talk to each other so that areas like that aren't the cluster-fucks they are now. Unfortunately, coordinated systems rarely account for entering side-street traffic. Frankly, some of our signals (maybe the majority of them) would actually work better as free-running within the network than they do coordinated. Coordinated signals on the whole have a very limited ability to respond to individual actuations. Dutch Engineer posted:One of the best things about being a near-graduation civil engineering student: companies showing off their best works to attract new young people. Today we visited a new and pretty cool project called the Westrandweg near Amsterdam. That's very cool! Thanks so much for the pictures. Why weren't mobile cranes allowed? How many lanes are on the finished viaduct? 80 000 ADT isn't all that much; three in each direction would probably suffice, even two in a pinch.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2010 22:07
|
|
|
Roflex posted:So I dug up an old DOS game which I remember playing years ago. It's overly simplistic and the interface leaves much to be desired, so I'm getting started on a modern version of it. I'm basically thinking the general idea is the same - you have a predefined area of streets and the extent of what you can do is largely limited to setting signals and markings, possibly with a progression aspect where you might gradually build up funds to take on larger projects like widening arterials. Not exactly going for a realistic approach to gameplay. Maybe one day I'll expand it to a larger simcity-type game but for now I just want to make something fairly simple. That looks like something I'd play the heck out of. The MUTCD doesn't go into specifics because different places do it differently, but here's what we do, and a good guideline to go off: Normal-width lines are 4" wide. Double lines are 4" wide with a 4" gap, for a total width of 12". Lane lines on freeways are 6" wide, for improved visibility. When we have HOV lanes, we put double 12" lines with a 4" gap between. Anything else you'd like to know? Iridium posted:This thread is awesome, and it's proven to me that a few of the spots I've identified as badly designed on my commute are, in fact, poo poo. VICTORY. Putting in the barrier would help prevent merging at the last minute, but it would move the problem farther south. I think it would also reduce the congestion. Putting a turn into the left turn lanes is also a good idea. You could even have them cross the opposing through lanes prior to the intersection, creating a continuous flow intersection. The best solution to keep people from waiting until the last possible moment to get in the proper lane is to get rid of the problem: a lack of downstream capacity. Of course, it doesn't get much higher capacity than a double lane add onto a freeway... hmm... How about grade-separating the through lanes, removing that phase from the signal, and improving capacity all over? It would also help with that queue backing into the signal to the east. If you're a really forward-thinking engineer, you could try to reduce demand. Put in a bus lane, or light rail, or some other very expensive implementation, and you can help things a bit. If you're the authoritarian sort, get some cops out there and bust people for driving in the wrong lane. If you're an environmentalist, get rid of the road and build a bike path. And if you're running for mayor, promise to fix it during the campaign and then have your engineer change the timings by a couple seconds once you're elected.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2010 22:23
|
|
|
Are lane widths measured from the insides of the markings or from the centers? Very nitpicky, I know, but it's the kind of error that can accumulate greatly over a series of copy-pastes. e: Oh, and grading. How much height difference would there be between the center of a road and the gutter on different types of roads (side streets, arterials, highways)? e2: I've got 80 feet of road.  The gaps between roadbed tiles are just due to rendering error in inkscape and shouldn't be there in the game. Scale is 1" ~= 1 pixel. Xerol fucked around with this message at 23:52 on Sep 13, 2010 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2010 23:14
|
|
|
Roflex posted:Are lane widths measured from the insides of the markings or from the centers? Very nitpicky, I know, but it's the kind of error that can accumulate greatly over a series of copy-pastes. From the center. The width of the stripe is included as part of the lane width. Edit: You're doing cross-slopes, too? That's dedication. Shoot for 2% cross-slope across travel lanes and bike paths, and 4% on shoulders. On wider roads, the crown should vary from 3% at the outside edge of the outer lanes to 1% in the inner lanes. A flat 2% slope might be best for simplicity's sake. 2% per 12' lane equals 2.88 inches. Don't forget superelevation on curves, either. Superelevation goes up to about 6% on two-way roads, and 10% on freeways, as a general guide. Cichlidae fucked around with this message at 00:08 on Sep 14, 2010 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2010 23:33
|
|
|
I love this thread. Can you explain what design capacity mean in something like this?quote:The existing Q-Bridge opened with a design capacity of 90,000 vehicles per day (VPD), but as of 2006 more than 150,000 vehicles cross the span daily.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2010 14:19
|
|
|
I noticed something kind of weird the other day. The southbound entrance to the parkway from Long Ridge Road is a T intersection. I sit at the end of the exit ramp http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=...,239.41,,0,5.59 and the signal pattern is -Traffic from the right goes gets a green light and protected left turn -Protected left ends, both ways get green light and people coming from the left get angry because it's a stop controlled entrance ramp so people getting onto the ramp are backed up and blocking traffic from the left. Eventually a few cars get past, which is most of them because only people who live in North Stamford actually drive to North Stamford. -Traffic from the left stops and traffic from the right gets another protected left. -People coming off the exit ramp get a green light and I make several rude gestures at people turning left onto the ramp because they're blocking me from making a left turn and I'm already 5 minutes late for work. Is the protected left at the beginning and end of the cycle a standard thing? Is splitting it because of the stop controlled ramp a crude form of ramp metering? Is it a good idea?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2010 16:36
|
|
|
smackfu posted:I love this thread. Can you explain what design capacity mean in something like this? The design capacity isn't the maximum volume that something can hold, but rather the volume predicted for 20 years past when it was designed. If I'm designing a road now that will carry 30,000 cars in 2030, that's the design volume. By 2040, it may actually have 50,000, but 30k is still the design volume. The road may or may not be over capacity; we try to design for LOS B or C where we can. GWBBQ posted:I noticed something kind of weird the other day. The southbound entrance to the parkway from Long Ridge Road is a T intersection. I sit at the end of the exit ramp http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=...,239.41,,0,5.59 and the signal pattern is First answer first, it's not a standard thing. It was probably done because the left-turn storage southbound is so short, the queues need to be released twice a cycle so they don't back into the through lane. It's a cheaper fix than widening the road. If it were a 4-way intersection instead of a T-intersection, you'd have a left-turn trap, but it's not a big problem in the current situation. I wouldn't design this sort of thing in new construction, but as a retrofit, it's better than backing queues through the next intersection. Is it a form of ramp metering? I suppose you could say that, but I'm sure the stop sign is a more restrictive bottleneck than a signal that lets traffic flow freely onto the on-ramp during 3 out of 4 phases.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2010 22:10
|
|
|
Well I have an intersection. Does the pavement lettering look elongated enough? MUTCD lists 6 feet as the minimum height and these are about that, but there wasn't much on the aspect ratio of the lettering. The stop bars are 2 feet long as specified but there wasn't anything on the width, so I had them stop about 6 inches from the centerline and gutter. I think the corners should probably be cut back a bit more too, but those are about standard for (existing) construction around here, even on arterials, except where there's wheelchair ramps, but all of those are <10 years old. The tiles are 10x10 feet, for reference. Also I think the guy who made up the example images is from Maryland, 3 of these are MD roads and the last 2 are Delaware.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2010 23:30
|
|
|
Roflex posted:Well I have an intersection. I assume you decided not to do the cross-slope. You should also think about shoulders. They're generally 4 feet wide, but go up to 12' on freeways. The letter elongation seems a little short, but it is a low-speed roadway, and you want it to be legible from the isometric view, so that should be fine. Most of our stop bars are 1' wide, not two, but that's a regional thing. Do whatever looks better. And as for their length, they should go from the middle of the centerline to the very edge of pavement, including any shoulder you may have. quote:I think the corners should probably be cut back a bit more too, but those are about standard for (existing) construction around here, even on arterials, except where there's wheelchair ramps, but all of those are <10 years old. The tiles are 10x10 feet, for reference. Don't forget to add detectable warning surfaces on your wheelchair ramps. You can find their specs in the ADA Accessibility Guidelines, but basically they're a series of orthogonally-aligned .5" bumps, each about 1" wide and spaced maybe 2" apart. There's a lot of flexibility in those numbers. For curb radii, small radii are fine for small roads. For roads trucks use, shoot for 40' radii, and 45' in heavily traveled corridors, with a 4' offset. So, do a 10:1 taper for 40 feet until the curbline is 4' farther from the centerline than it was, and then build a curve tangent to that, meeting a taper on the far side of the corner. quote:Also I think the guy who made up the example images is from Maryland, 3 of these are MD roads and the last 2 are Delaware. There are quite a few Maryland roads in there, not all of them accurate. If you look in the guide sign section of the MUTCD, you'll notice plenty more.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2010 23:44
|
|
|
The cross-slope is in there, it's 2 inches per 10' lane, since 3 inches would've meant having to deal with a half-pixel boundary in the center of a lane (which is just annoying) and 4 inches seemed excessive. You can kind of see it at the edges of the roads there, of course since 1 pixel = 1" it's only 4 pixels on the main road and 2 on the side street. I'm not actually doing much road design at this point, just putting together a bunch of elements that can be used as tiles in the game. edit: The gutters aren't sloped yet, either.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2010 00:11
|
|
|
Roflex posted:The cross-slope is in there, it's 2 inches per 10' lane, since 3 inches would've meant having to deal with a half-pixel boundary in the center of a lane (which is just annoying) and 4 inches seemed excessive. You can kind of see it at the edges of the roads there, of course since 1 pixel = 1" it's only 4 pixels on the main road and 2 on the side street. I'm not actually doing much road design at this point, just putting together a bunch of elements that can be used as tiles in the game. Very subtle! I see it now. All of our cross-sections are exaggerated 10X vertically, so it doesn't pop out nearly as much in the isometric as I'd expected. Edit: If you want to get really detailed, you could put in catch basins along the curbs as well to handle stormwater.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2010 00:39
|
|
|
So, uh, I bought a stop light today. It plugs into a normal wall outlet, but I think I'm gonna just take the individual wires from each bulb assembly so I can access their power individually. It's metal and pretty worn. The red light cover has no paint left on it, while the others are mostly fine. It weighs 33 lbs. It has 5 power connectors inside. One is unused. What do you think it's for?  Click here for the full 2048x1216 image. ijustam fucked around with this message at 02:14 on Sep 15, 2010 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2010 01:46
|
|
|
While traveling to Plymouth/Wareham Massachusetts last week via 395 and US 6, I again was curious about the speed limit of CT SR 695. Why is the limit on this stretch only 55 MPH? From what I gather, this is a piece of the ill-fated Hartford-Providence expressway, so it's not like it's a substandard road. So my guess is the length? It does run for a couple of miles though, so maybe I'm wrong. Map for reference: http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&e...F-8&sa=N&tab=wl
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2010 12:07
|
|
|
ijustam posted:So, uh, I bought a stop light today. That fifth connector is a spare. You're in luck, actually, because it was just yesterday I looked through pinouts for signal heads. When you get into more complicated arrangements, there are actually separate conductors for white/black wires and black/white wires. How would you tell those apart? porkfriedrice posted:While traveling to Plymouth/Wareham Massachusetts last week via 395 and US 6, I again was curious about the speed limit of CT SR 695. Why is the limit on this stretch only 55 MPH? From what I gather, this is a piece of the ill-fated Hartford-Providence expressway, so it's not like it's a substandard road. So my guess is the length? It does run for a couple of miles though, so maybe I'm wrong. 695 gets ignored constantly, because it's not signed as such, it's in the corner of the state, and many traffic engineers don't even know it exists. Back when the STC removed the statewide speed limit years ago and brought some roads up to 65, it seems 695 was forgotten. Its geometry is basically identical to 395, so it was probably designed for 70 mph, as well. I've never seen any troopers there, though. Why not just drive 80 like everyone else? There's no traffic, it's relatively flat and only has one small curve. It's nearly 5 miles long, which is plenty to get up to a decent speed. Heck, it even has a numbered exit. 695 is as much of a road as the Milford Parkway, which gets a lot more attention.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2010 12:47
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:That fifth connector is a spare. You're in luck, actually, because it was just yesterday I looked through pinouts for signal heads. When you get into more complicated arrangements, there are actually separate conductors for white/black wires and black/white wires. How would you tell those apart? Hah, reminds me of this old Bob Newhart routine about a guy disabling a bomb - "Well, okay, one of the wires is supposed to be a bluish gray, and the other one is kind of a grayish blue..."
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2010 16:22
|
|
|
The street outside is getting sealed today. The grass isn't getting filled with rocks or oil, and there doesn't seem to be much of any excess. Obviously, they're doing it wrong. EDIT: Wow, stupid Aperture exported at the wrong size and stupid Crackpipe didn't double check it before posting.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2010 17:23
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:
Mobile cranes were not allowed because they would disturb the traffic underneath the fly-over too much. Also, cranes + railway power lines = sparks all over the place.  2X2 lanes + shoulder I believe, could be 2X3 though. Dutch Engineer fucked around with this message at 18:20 on Sep 15, 2010 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2010 18:17
|
|
|
Dutch Engineer posted:Mobile cranes were not allowed because they would disturb the traffic underneath the fly-over too much. Also, cranes + railway power lines = sparks all over the place. This happened on a job I worked at a bunch of years ago. I was a summer intern at PennDOT, and it was a giant rebuild of the I81/I84 interchange up by Scranton. There was a big honking transmission line running through the site, and it was supposed to have been turned off. Turned out it wasn't, and a crane got a little too close. At the time, I was sitting in my car, listening to the radio, filling out paperwork, and I heard the radio turn to static. Then I realized I could hear static outside, not just over the radio. That was the sound of the transmission line arcing to the crane before the upstream breaker tripped. Guy in the crane was okay, nobody got hurt, but that line needed repair where the arc almost burned through it. I didn't have my eyes on it when it happened, but guys said the arc jumped 6' through the air. That was a great job. Neatest part was we had to put a rail line in to go back to a quarry. I was an inspector, PennDOT doesn't have any inspection standards for a friggin' railroad. So I got to stand around for a few days and watch a railroad go in, and then say on the paperwork "Yep, they put a rail line in." The thermite welding was the coolest part.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2010 18:57
|
|
|
Dutch Engineer posted:Mobile cranes were not allowed because they would disturb the traffic underneath the fly-over too much. Also, cranes + railway power lines = sparks all over the place. If it's a 25-meter width, that could be 6x 3.5-meter lanes plus an extra 4 meters of shoulder, barrier, and parapet. Or, it could be 4x 3.5-meter lanes plus 11 extra meters somewhere. Phanatic posted:That was a great job. Neatest part was we had to put a rail line in to go back to a quarry. I was an inspector, PennDOT doesn't have any inspection standards for a friggin' railroad. So I got to stand around for a few days and watch a railroad go in, and then say on the paperwork "Yep, they put a rail line in." The thermite welding was the coolest part. The FRA (Federal Railroad Administration) inspectors have a sweet job, too. They visit all around the country, spend their time seeing the sights, relaxing on beaches, and hitting up the choicest bars for days at a time. Then they grab the paperwork and give it a once-over once they get home. I'd love to see thermite welding in person, though I'm not sure I'd be able to resist the temptation to look up close. Still not quite as cool as shooting slag deposits out of a furnace with a shotgun, though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2010 02:43
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:If it's a 25-meter width, that could be 6x 3.5-meter lanes plus an extra 4 meters of shoulder, barrier, and parapet. Or, it could be 4x 3.5-meter lanes plus 11 extra meters somewhere. I just checked to make sure, and it's 2 X 2 + 1 emergency lane on both sides. The emergency lanes may be converted to regular lanes in the future though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2010 20:49
|
|
|
I take it this isn't supposed to happen normally.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2010 22:10
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:I'd love to see thermite welding in person, though I'm not sure I'd be able to resist the temptation to look up close. Still not quite as cool as shooting slag deposits out of a furnace with a shotgun, though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roZXBr2Iv0k
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2010 22:31
|
|
|
Roflex posted:I take it this isn't supposed to happen normally. That's a classic impalement, and the reason we bury the ends of our beam rails underground (bolted to a concrete block) or bolt them flush to a concrete parapet. Nesnej posted:Welding is cool, but rail grinding in really the poo poo. That really IS impressive! Looks like something I'd see in some sort of futuristic hell on a mining colony. Do they grind the tracks to bring them back to a smooth shape? Does the loss of flange height change the speed class of the rail?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2010 02:58
|
|
|
Nesnej posted:Welding is cool, but rail grinding in really the poo poo. Not when it's done at 3am on the metro line across the street from your apartment. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2010 14:35
|
|
|
ijustam posted:So, uh, I bought a stop light today. One site actually sells relatively cheap and good sequencers - http://www.trafficlights.com
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2010 16:04
|
|
|
Hi, I am new to this thread. I live in Southern Ontario, Canada and am a self-proclaimed highway historian for Ontario's highways (and former highways). I hang out with other roadgeeks and it can get pretty intense. Here, you will find such cool things as Parclo A4s on most freeway interchanges, Ontario Tall Wall keeping you from smashing into oncoming traffic you drunk bastard, VERY few cloverleafs remaining (the very first one just got A4'd), and the busiest section of freeway in North America by AADT. I read the first couple pages here but I don't have the patience to read through 63 of them. So if there's any non-engineering questions (the OP can handle) but any historical or other poo poo you want cleared up about Ontario's roads maybe I can help.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2010 16:25
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:That really IS impressive! Looks like something I'd see in some sort of futuristic hell on a mining colony. Do they grind the tracks to bring them back to a smooth shape? This only works for a very specific speed and since some trains are considerably slower than others, they end up going through the corners with one wheel slipping and the track ends up like this:  Corrugated rails make a lot more noise and cause more stress on rolling stock than smooth rails do, so every once in a while they grind the rails so that they are nice and smooth again. Cichlidae posted:Does the loss of flange height change the speed class of the rail? less than three posted:Not when it's done at 3am on the metro line across the street from your apartment.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2010 16:49
|
|
|
Nesnej posted:Night time is unfortunately the right time for railway maintenance because that's the only time nobody needs to use the rails. And as this thread has proven, it looks cooler.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2010 19:19
|
|
|
Horse Pepsi posted:One site actually sells relatively cheap and good sequencers - http://www.trafficlights.com I'm curious what their sequencers cost, but the store page doesn't seem to be loading for me. Does anyone else have any luck? Millstone posted:Hi, I am new to this thread. I have a quick question. In rural areas, does Canada tend to build freeways alongside the roads they bypass, or upgrade those roads into freeways by adding extra lanes and grade-separating? Nesnej posted:Yes. Train wheels are fixed to the axles and don't have a differential because it would be ludicrously big on a train. Train wheels aren't flat but conical, so the centrifugal force a train experiences when maneuvering a corner "pushes" it out so that the outer wheel has a larger diameter than the inner. In theory. Thanks for the explanation! Things like this make me feel vindicated that I majored in engineering instead of architecture. Crackpipe posted:And as this thread has proven, it looks cooler. Heck yeah. Once I get my Amtrak cert, I'll try to wrangle my way onto a maintenance crew and have a look.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2010 21:52
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:I'm curious what their sequencers cost, but the store page doesn't seem to be loading for me. Does anyone else have any luck? http://www.trafficlights.com/catalog.htm
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2010 22:02
|
|
|
theflyingexecutive posted:http://www.trafficlights.com/catalog.htm Those still seem tremendously expensive for a pretimed signal controller. Seems like you could build a much more versatile microcontroller for about the same price. Oh well, it's still better than a $10,000 field controller! Speaking of expensive, a supplier gave us a presentation yesterday on handicap-accessible pedestrian buttons. The new MUTCD recommends that they be used, so we're trying to make a specification for them, and we wanted to see what's out there. This particular brand has a locator tone that beeps intermittently, can play back a voice message, and can vibrate when pressed; these are pretty standard features. The cost is about $800 per button, and that doesn't include the configurator ($400), backplate for signs, installation, ped head, or controller. Some of our signals have a dozen or more ped buttons. That's kinda pricey!
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2010 22:27
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:This particular brand has a locator tone that beeps intermittently, can play back a voice message, and can vibrate when pressed; these are pretty standard features. The cost is about $800 per button, and that doesn't include the configurator ($400), backplate for signs, installation, ped head, or controller. Some of our signals have a dozen or more ped buttons. That's kinda pricey! Ouch! Our city (Vancouver) started installing these instead of normal metal push buttons, but not for very long. (They made the beep and would vibrate when the signal was illuminating Walk)  I didn't really like them, because it was hard to tell sometimes if it was triggered, as the beep was only every 3 or 4 seconds, and quite quiet. Then they switched to these, which seem to use capacitance or something because you don't actually 'push' it, rather just come into contact with the metal piece. I like them better. The LED flashes and it makes a loud beep to confirm you've activated it.  Plus if you want to piss off the person next to you, it lets you retrigger immediately and you can just keep brushing against it, unleashing an attack of "Beep-Boop-Beep-Boop-Beep-Boop" constantly until you can walk.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2010 22:54
|
|
|
You would think that economies of scale would come into play given how many intersections there are out there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2010 22:56
|
|
|
Crackpipe posted:You would think that economies of scale would come into play given how many intersections there are out there. There's only so many SHA's and only so many people making these things. It wouldn't surprise me if for a lot of items there's only one or two manufacturers, and in the case where there's more they probably tend to stay regionalized so there's only one or two available to a particular state. Plus you have to figure these are (ostensibly) being built to certain standards of durability that most manufacturers wouldn't generally be able to achieve. There's still 30-year-old traffic lights and ped signals around here that I bet haven't had any maintenance besides changing the bulb every few years. e: Cichlidae, when trying to get money for projects do you usually budget for replacements/maintenance on the electronics over their typical lifespan? Xerol fucked around with this message at 23:50 on Sep 17, 2010 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2010 23:46
|
|
|
less than three posted:Ouch! That's the Bulldog, sold by Polara. It has a piezoelectric sensor and only requires a depression of less than 1/16 of an inch to activate. That's why you need the beep and the LED, otherwise you wouldn't know whether it worked. The Bulldog is specially made to be tamper-resistant, and you can smash the thing for hours before it'll give way. They're rated for at least 100 million pushes. Sorry if I sound like a sales rep here; I absorb a lot of useless information. The sign in your picture, by the way, is only 5" by 7". The ones we use are 9" by 12", and require an extra bracket that bolts onto the basic one. The two holes next to the red LED are infrared sensors that transfer information to and from the configurator. Roflex posted:There's only so many SHA's and only so many people making these things. It wouldn't surprise me if for a lot of items there's only one or two manufacturers, and in the case where there's more they probably tend to stay regionalized so there's only one or two available to a particular state. That I could recognize the brand and model instantly from a picture of a button is pretty striking evidence that this is true.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2010 23:53
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:
Can't speak for "Canada" per se, but as far as Ontario goes, we built a lot of freeways (the 400s) starting around WWII and continuing into the 60s-70s on new alignments, the most major of which (Hwy 401 from the Quebec border to Ontario/Windsor border) bypassed a 2 lane historical road, Hwy 2 (more or less). Hwy 400 is more or less a bypass of Hwy 11 north of Toronto to Barrie, and as it continues northwest, it is swallowing up an old alignment of Hwy 69 which just gets another carriageway and geometry improvements, and then the route number renamed to 400 as the route expands. (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sou...2,317.5,,0,7.19) New construction is often generally staged with the intention of upgrading to freeway standards down the road. However there have been lots of challenges along the way. Highway 401 through Toronto has 18 lanes in one spot and there is no more ROW to expand, despite increasing traffic volume. Also, as you're aware, building new freeways isn't as "en vogue" as it was in the 1950s when Robert Moses was doing it. Jane Jacobs definitely had her way up here and prevented most of the proposed Toronto expressway network from being built in the late 60s-70s. Joe 30330 fucked around with this message at 00:06 on Sep 18, 2010 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2010 00:03
|
|
|
Wow, I only just started reading this thread today, before I realized that there are 24 pages of replies just from the OP. Thanks for keeping this thread active, Cichlidae! As has been mentioned, North Americans seem to have some aversion to roundabouts, but they're starting to pop up here and there. Where I live, this behemoth (by North American standards) of a roundabout just opened about a year ago...  This was installed as part of the Evans Road Connector Project, where the Evans Road highway overpass was also installed. Google Map: http://goo.gl/vcRM I'm a big fan of roundabouts... when used properly, they move traffic quite well, but being in North America, nobody seems to know how to use them and quite a few accidents have been caused because of this. The City even put a roundabout simulator online (http://goo.gl/roDk) so that people could learn how to use it properly. At first glance, it looks very confusing... but taken the time to learn how to properly navigate it, it makes perfect sense. What are your thoughts on how they designed this roundabout? Would you have done it differently?
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2010 00:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 11:34 |
|
|
Swanson posted:Wow, I only just started reading this thread today, before I realized that there are 24 pages of replies just from the OP. Thanks for keeping this thread active, Cichlidae!
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2010 00:18
|
|