|
Baronjutter posted:Is there a special sort of sign that basically says "yo if you turn right there's going to be a train track right there so like be careful, maybe stop back here if there is otherwise you'll be caught in the intersection" ? Yup! Check it out: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part8/part8b.htm That has plenty of examples you might be able to use.
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 09:00 |
|
|
Not quite the same thing but we have some light up signs on a busy intersection that has a railroad crossing nearly immediately after it that light up to tell you not to turn right or left because a train is there. I hate that the new Google maps wont let me link to street view anymore but you can see it in the intersection here. There just black boxes normally but when a train is there they light up with a generic No Right/Left Turn sign.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 03:54
|
|
|
Ah W10-4 seems to perfectly represent the situation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 05:24
|
|
|
Opals25 posted:Not quite the same thing but we have some light up signs on a busy intersection that has a railroad crossing nearly immediately after it that light up to tell you not to turn right or left because a train is there. Here's a nice look at one that protects a vertical lift bridge They are useful, but in this case all the traffic lights are tied together in order to maintain flow on the canal-side parkways until the boat is clear, and then giving a longer than normal amount of time to clear the traffic that has been built up. Luckily, the lift doesn't operate during rush hour.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Yup! Check it out: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part8/part8b.htm Interesting link! I googled some of those signs, and this image was one of the results. What exactly is the use for the sign in that image that says "150 Feet between highway and tracks behind you."? I'm having trouble imagining a road/rail arrangement that would make use of that information on a sign. Opals25 posted:I hate that the new Google maps wont let me link to street view anymore In the bottom right corner, click on the question mark speech bubble to return to classic maps. RadioPassive fucked around with this message at 19:21 on Apr 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
RadioPassive posted:Interesting link! I googled some of those signs, and this image was one of the results. What exactly is the use for the sign in that image that says "150 Feet between highway and tracks behind you."? I'm having trouble imagining a road/rail arrangement that would make use of that information on a sign. The distance between intersection and tracks behind you is probably useful for people planning to make something like a u-turn using the intersection - I'd expect there's only a few places in the country where traffic flows make this useful, but it's nice to have standardized. It might also be useful information for drivers of large/long vehicles that might end up taking up too much space.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 19:37
|
|
|
RadioPassive posted:Interesting link! I googled some of those signs, and this image was one of the results. What exactly is the use for the sign in that image that says "150 Feet between highway and tracks behind you."? I'm having trouble imagining a road/rail arrangement that would make use of that information on a sign. That information would be useful for semis and busses. This intersection is on one of my routes home, and that information would be useful to any longer vehicles stuck at one of the lights either side of the rail crossing. Why you would need to do that instead of timing your lights properly, I don't know. Both sets of lights have an "escape green" that clears the intersection as the gates come down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
Kakairo posted:That information would be useful for semis and busses. This intersection is on one of my routes home, and that information would be useful to any longer vehicles stuck at one of the lights either side of the rail crossing. It's for heavy vehicles and convoys, yeah. But we can't always program pre-emption into our signals (and sometimes, when we do, the towns just disconnect them because they're too complicated to maintain).
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
Well, there's this thing: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...41f4_story.html I'm all for figuring out transport funding, but my municipality is going to loving LOVE this development...
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:It's for heavy vehicles and convoys, yeah. But we can't always program pre-emption into our signals (and sometimes, when we do, the towns just disconnect them because they're too complicated to maintain).
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 06:17
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:Well, there's this thing: 
Varance fucked around with this message at 14:27 on May 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 14:12
|
|
|
Some news in Dutch. So basically, some folks invented a thing called "glowing lines". Those are road markings that absorb the sun's UV light during the day and release it as visible light during the night. The inventors claim that they could replace street lights completely. It still needs some electricity, to keep the light intensity constant, independent of weather conditions. That means the lines can also be 'shut down'. There's been some international attention and both Beijing and Cape Town are thinking of getting these lines. So, the lines worked perfectly fine in the lab and were recently tested on a small stretch of road in Holland. After a month or so, they were shut down, because they were dying bit by bit. Apparently, the problem is that the 'pigments' can't tolerate much moisture. The inventors say they're working on "Glowing Lines 2.0". Whatever. If it works, I think it's a good idea. I just can't believe that they didn't think to test in the lab whether the stuff can stand moisture and rain.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 15:16
|
|
|
Are the dutch scientists the aliens from "Signs" ?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 16:02
|
|
|
So apparently very few people know about the administration's new tack on recovery spending, the hideously-acronymed transportation bill released on Tuesday. Hasn't gotten much traction in the media although Time magazine had this article. I think infrastructure spending is sexy 
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Are the dutch scientists the aliens from "Signs" ? Considering how much work the Dutch do to protect themselves from water, that is actually possible.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 16:23
|
|
|
Varance posted:Hell, Tampa was looking into ways of tolling local roads before this even came up. Tolls, Tolls Everywhere. Given the political impossibility of raising gas taxes in the USA, I'm not sure how else you'd do it. I like that the fund is due to run out just in time for the elections. I wonder if congress will turn this into a replay of the default crisis in miniature.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
Tech researcher says traffic control systems in major cities in the US, UK, France, China and other countries are really easy to hack.
Carbon dioxide fucked around with this message at 17:02 on May 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
whitey delenda est posted:So apparently very few people know about the administration's new tack on recovery spending, the hideously-acronymed transportation bill released on Tuesday. Hasn't gotten much traction in the media although Time magazine had this article. Some Congressional Intern Who Had to Shove This Backronym posted:The GROW AMERICA Act, or Generating Renewal, Opportunity, and Work with Accelerated Mobility, Efficiency, and Rebuilding of Infrastructure and Communities throughout America, will do exactly what its name implies Seriously?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
quote:The GROW AMERICA Act, or Generating Renewal, Opportunity, and Work with Accelerated Mobility, Efficiency, and Rebuilding of Infrastructure and Communities throughout America, will do exactly what its name implies  That's beautiful. Well done nameless intern.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 17:54
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Carbon dioxide posted:Tech researcher says traffic control systems in major cities in the US, UK, France, China and other countries are really easy to hack.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:
Never thought they'd top SAFETEA-LU. Now if Bill Shuster somehow works his wife's name into the final acronym...
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 01:12
|
|
|
 Are, uh, signs supposed to do that? I assume there's an amount of sway built in to them for high winds, but that looks a little intense.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 01:40
|
|
|
AA is for Quitters posted:
No, that one collapsed onto the road during the video that's captured from.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
AA is for Quitters posted:
If you get more than a few inches of movement, you're in deep poo poo. There's a sign support near my house that I refuse to drive beneath because it gallops whenever a truck passes beneath. Its rating went from 7 to 4 in one inspection cycle :O
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:If you get more than a few inches of movement, you're in deep poo poo. There's a sign support near my house that I refuse to drive beneath because it gallops whenever a truck passes beneath. Its rating went from 7 to 4 in one inspection cycle :O
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 03:48
|
|
|
Whoops: http://www.sbsun.com/general-news/20140505/hesperia-bridge-fire-forces-closure-of-15-freeway http://sanbag.ca.gov/projects/1-15_Ranchero/rancherofactsheet-tw-rev-ac.pdf Well, that is one way to have an unanticipated construction delay. Of course this is on my commute and I-15 is closed until at least Wednesday.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 04:55
|
|
|
nm posted:Whoops: Oof, that is TERRIBLE. For anyone who doubts that fire from jet fuel could make a building collapse, look at what a wood fire did to that steel rebar. Fire will gently caress your concrete, too, which conveniently turns pink when it's damaged beyond repair.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 12:21
|
|
|
Speaking of damaged under construction bridges... truckers just managed to rip down part of a SPUI flyover in Clearwater, FL. http://tbo.com/news/traffic/crash-closes-us-19-gulf-to-bay-blvd-in-clearwater-20140506/  AADT counts:  
Varance fucked around with this message at 19:57 on May 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Oof, that is TERRIBLE. For anyone who doubts that fire from jet fuel could make a building collapse, look at what a wood fire did to that steel rebar. Fire will gently caress your concrete, too, which conveniently turns pink when it's damaged beyond repair. Is there a reason to do what they're doing instead of using pre-cast segments for the bridge? Seems like using pre-cast segments would be faster to do, and maybe cheaper since labor is expensive.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 05:02
|
|
|
Varance posted:Speaking of damaged under construction bridges... truckers just managed to rip down part of a SPUI flyover in Clearwater, FL.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 06:24
|
|
|
mamosodiumku posted:Is there a reason to do what they're doing instead of using pre-cast segments for the bridge? Seems like using pre-cast segments would be faster to do, and maybe cheaper since labor is expensive. Faster? Maybe in terms of on-site time. You'd still need to put in the hours to build casts, bend rebar and pour concrete, whether you do in on a build site or in a cement factory. So it's not obvious that it would take less labor. For buildings with standardized segments (let's say you use the same or similar layout on 40 floors), obviously mass producing them in a factory could be cheaper. I really don't think you'd save much on a bridge project, though. There's also the issue of transporting huge concrete slabs as opposed to ready-mix concrete. And you can make bigger segments if pouring on-site.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 13:27
|
|
|
mamosodiumku posted:Is there a reason to do what they're doing instead of using pre-cast segments for the bridge? Seems like using pre-cast segments would be faster to do, and maybe cheaper since labor is expensive. Prefabricated bridges are a thing, but it's really only feasible for pedestrian bridges and other smaller things where you can fit the whole bridge (either length or width) on a truck, and then assemble the whole thing with a splice or two. For an enormous roadway bridge, where you have a steel or concrete girder that's 4 feet deep (see Varance's photo for an example) there's really no way to cheat and replace it with a smaller pre-cast member. And you really don't want to do the bridge deck with precast elements with a ton of joints, because every spot that water gets below the bridge deck is a future point of deterioration and failure for the bridge.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 13:35
|
|
|
They do a lot of prefabbing for bridge elements here in the NL though. Often on site because transporting them is indeed problematic, but they can be huge time and space savers compared to in situ pouring where you might need lots of hours of closed roadways. Most Dutch (re)construction contracts take lane closures in account as a performance metric these days, so there's been a boom in using prefabbed elements IIRC. e: like here for example - or at least I think this should count. They'll hoist the deck on top of the abutments and it'll come out like this: 
Koesj fucked around with this message at 15:03 on May 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
mamosodiumku posted:Is there a reason to do what they're doing instead of using pre-cast segments for the bridge? Seems like using pre-cast segments would be faster to do, and maybe cheaper since labor is expensive. They're a decent amount more expensive, and traditionally, you have fewer options for geometry and architecture. You are also limited in your span length (due to shipping), but you can always ship in smaller pieces and assemble them on-site, then hoist into place. Accelerated bridge construction is becoming more and more common, though, as people realize that saving months of traffic impacts has a positive effect on the local economy.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
As a followup, who gets to pay for the damages for an accidental bridge construction fire? The contractors? Feels like with the pricing of bridges, the contractors wouldn't have the money to pay for it.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
mamosodiumku posted:As a followup, who gets to pay for the damages for an accidental bridge construction fire? The contractors? Feels like with the pricing of bridges, the contractors wouldn't have the money to pay for it. If it was due to some ongoing documented act of negligence it might mean real deep poo poo for the contractor. Otherwise, it would probably mean the contractor making a claim against his insurance for the damage. Sometimes poo poo just happens, and you can't have the contractor just going out of business when it does.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 03:00
|
|
|
Insurance should cover it, unless the gently caress-up violates the terms of the insurance policy, in which case a smaller contractor like the one doing the I-15/Ranchero Rd project will be in serious financial trouble. Any sane government agency would have required the contractor be bonded for some percentage of the project cost, just in case the contractor goes out of business mid-project, something catastrophic happens, the contractor abandons ship, the work is substandard and requires repair before use, etc.. The bond provides a buffer that can be used to secure another contractor to finish the job (or restart).
Varance fucked around with this message at 08:45 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 08:02
|
|
|
Long Beach Post posted:Potholes: they are the silent menace of the streets, the sneaky asphalt monsters that have caused many a rolled ankle, flat tire and near-death biking experience. And they can be attributed to the increasingly problematic road conditions in Los Angeles County. Has anyone heard of this system of asphalt pothole repair? They use infrared heating to melt asphalt roads and then add more material to create a seamless patch. They boast that it can be done in an hour for $300. This technique seems to be really awesome, both because it's cheap but also because it's so quick. If they can start a pothole fix and have it back to drivability in an hour, then that really opens up a lot of options in terms of fixing problem roads that are simply too important to close. New York, for instance, has notoriously bad potholes but the idea of closing down a lane for a day so they can fix potholes is completely out of the question because it would cause a massive traffic impact and exact millions of dollars in damage to the local economy. But if they can fix a pothole in an hour, then they can do it from 3am-4am without too much disruption, which means they can actually fix the roads. Of course they won't be able to use it on the old 1950s concrete roads that still dominate the system, but those are gradually being phased out in favor of asphalt.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 19:06
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Has anyone heard of this system of asphalt pothole repair? They use infrared heating to melt asphalt roads and then add more material to create a seamless patch. They boast that it can be done in an hour for $300. This technique seems to be really awesome, both because it's cheap but also because it's so quick. If they can start a pothole fix and have it back to drivability in an hour, then that really opens up a lot of options in terms of fixing problem roads that are simply too important to close. New York, for instance, has notoriously bad potholes but the idea of closing down a lane for a day so they can fix potholes is completely out of the question because it would cause a massive traffic impact and exact millions of dollars in damage to the local economy. But if they can fix a pothole in an hour, then they can do it from 3am-4am without too much disruption, which means they can actually fix the roads. Of course they won't be able to use it on the old 1950s concrete roads that still dominate the system, but those are gradually being phased out in favor of asphalt. I haven't heard of that before, but it sounds pretty cool. The biggest issue I can think of is that it's a proprietary system, which makes procurement a lot tougher for public entities. ----- Who wants more Busway drama? Last year, we closed down a grade crossing of a minor road across the main Amtrak line. It had to be done because of safety (really should have happened decades ago), but since the Busway goes right through the crossing, it became even more of an imperative. The typical rule with new construction is "you touch it, you fix it," so the DOT had a 2-year legal battle to close the thing. They eventually agreed to spend $4m on a pedestrian overpass to calm some of the opposition. And then last night, this happened: http://courantblogs.com/capitol-watch/fonfara-fights-busway-trying-to-keep-flower-street-open/ So now the DOT is legally required to re-open the grade crossing, which is going to require a big redesign of the Busway crossing (there is nowhere at all to put crossing arms or signal equipment) and probably waste another ten or twenty million while this goes through courts all over again. Politics in action!
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 09:00 |
|
|
Cichlidae posted:I haven't heard of that before, but it sounds pretty cool. The biggest issue I can think of is that it's a proprietary system, which makes procurement a lot tougher for public entities. Yeah I'm quite curious about it since the article definitely sounds like a PR publicity pitch for a local company, so I'd love to hear if the system actually works. If so, it seems like it could be a big deal for pothole repair.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 01:22
|
|