|
Basically, yeah. It's kind of a stupid name, but I didn't make the chart.
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 20:14 |
|
|
So something like 70% of the electricity is lost? Is that transmission losses + efficiency losses in the appliances?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
quote:"BRIDGEPORT - State transportation officials met Wednesday at Housatonic Community College to discuss ways to ease traffic I-95 congestion. http://connecticut.news12.com/news/connecticut-transportation-officials-discuss-ways-to-ease-i-95-congestion-1.8337680  Is this... a... thing? A thing? I don't even know what to say, it sounds like lunacy to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
Zodijackylite posted:http://connecticut.news12.com/news/connecticut-transportation-officials-discuss-ways-to-ease-i-95-congestion-1.8337680 High Occupancy Toll Lanes? Sure. Usually they do new construction instead of just re-striping in order to be less obvious, but it's a decent way to make sure that us rich people can get where we're going on time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
Ika posted:So something like 70% of the electricity is lost? Is that transmission losses + efficiency losses in the appliances? I'm not sure -- it's not really my area, just an example of a chart I liked. This article says T&D losses are ~67%% in the US, but I've seen others that say 6%, so I'm not sure. That chart probably includes power plant efficiency, as electrical losses, but I would think losses in appliances would show up under residential or commercial.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:What is rejected energy? Just energy lost to heat ? Rejected Energy goes on to post on Energy Rights Advocates subreddits and complain to their friends how they're really Nice Energy, but those stupid picky-yet-slutty Energy Services won't put out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
Zodijackylite posted:http://connecticut.news12.com/news/connecticut-transportation-officials-discuss-ways-to-ease-i-95-congestion-1.8337680 There's a whole political agenda going on behind the scenes, and there is so much more than transportation involved. I really don't want to get blackballed, though, so I'll have to keep my mouth shut. Blue Moonlight posted:Rejected Energy goes on to post on Energy Rights Advocates subreddits and complain to their friends how they're really Nice Energy, but those stupid picky-yet-slutty Energy Services won't put out. Haha, lovely. Incelectrons.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
Ika posted:So something like 70% of the electricity is lost? Is that transmission losses + efficiency losses in the appliances? All fuel have some theoretical maximum amount of energy. Though due to inefficiencies, it is not possible to capture all of the energy. Rejected energy is the portion that is not captured. It's usually rejected to the atmosphere as heat. (E.g. An incandescent light bulb is very hot because, instead of generating light, most of the energy is rejected as heat.) All the losses are added up at the end in the chart, so it accounts for losses in electric generation, transmission, and use (amongst other things). On a different note, is there a reason for signals to be purposefully uncoordinated if the signals are all controlled by one agency? I notice on my drive home there's always a stretch where I hit two reds in a row. But everywhere else on the road, it's mostly green lights all the way. (I emailed the county and the city and they both said that the signals are controlled by the state.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
mamosodiumku posted:On a different note, is there a reason for signals to be purposefully uncoordinated if the signals are all controlled by one agency? I notice on my drive home there's always a stretch where I hit two reds in a row. But everywhere else on the road, it's mostly green lights all the way. (I emailed the county and the city and they both said that the signals are controlled by the state.) Varance fucked around with this message at 06:02 on Jun 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
Or, in New Haven's case, malicious traffic slowing to keep people in town longer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2014 14:16
|
|
|
Zodijackylite posted:http://connecticut.news12.com/news/connecticut-transportation-officials-discuss-ways-to-ease-i-95-congestion-1.8337680 I remember this happening in Atlanta. I thought we as a state were better than that poo poo. Near as I can recall they weren't even profitable enough there to support the construction of the pseudo-EZPass hardware needed to collect tolls from them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2014 14:46
|
|
|
Skeesix posted:I remember this happening in Atlanta. I thought we as a state were better than that poo poo. Near as I can recall they weren't even profitable enough there to support the construction of the pseudo-EZPass hardware needed to collect tolls from them. Yep. http://www.ajc.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/ga-400-shoulder-opens-traffic-still-a-bear/nQTfk/ http://www.sandyspringsga.org/SandySprings/media/Documents/Misc/GA-400-fact-sheet.pdf Wish I could find the planning video of the process, but man what a waste of money.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
Lights are supposed to be coordinated? I'm pretty sure Miami just installs the light, and the guy with the hard hat WAGs the timing when he's setting it up, and no one ever touches the thing after that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2014 02:08
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:Lights are supposed to be coordinated? I'm pretty sure Miami just installs the light, and the guy with the hard hat WAGs the timing when he's setting it up, and no one ever touches the thing after that. Yes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_wave Only works in one direction, though, so I assume they set it up for rush hour and change direction between morning and evening.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2014 07:03
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:Yes. You can get your green band to work in both directions if your signal spacing and speed limit sync up. Around here, signals are as irregular as they come, but in a downtown area, it's entirely possible to get good coordination in both directions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2014 14:56
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:Lights are supposed to be coordinated? I'm pretty sure Miami just installs the light, and the guy with the hard hat WAGs the timing when he's setting it up, and no one ever touches the thing after that. I rode a green wave on southbound Miami Ave. from Wynwood through downtown last night, worked great at the 30mph speed limit and basically no traffic. I've never seen any of the lights in the grove work like that though; too many intersections at irregular distances with long cycle times?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:I rode a green wave on southbound Miami Ave. from Wynwood through downtown last night, worked great at the 30mph speed limit and basically no traffic. Green waves really help to reinforce the speed limit. A town I used to live in implemented one a year before I left and it really reduced the amount of cars speeding through the residential area. Once people knew they had green lights going the set limit there was no reason to go faster. You do get the occasional person that is trying to make the end of the wave and speeds through some yellows, but all in all it really helped.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
Wki posted:Green waves really help to reinforce the speed limit. A town I used to live in implemented one a year before I left and it really reduced the amount of cars speeding through the residential area. Once people knew they had green lights going the set limit there was no reason to go faster. You do get the occasional person that is trying to make the end of the wave and speeds through some yellows, but all in all it really helped. I'm surprised more major routes don't do this. There's a few roads where I live where if you do exactly 50 or 55ish you'll hit a ton of greens. But the main highway out of town has fairly random lights, or lights that actually push people to speed. There's one section that's set ridiculously to 50 even though it's 3 and 3 lanes with a median and no driveways or side-streets but everyone drives 60-70 on it because if you do you can make the next light. But then the next few lights seemed timed so that there's no way to get them, you always get every red. I guess that's to stop speeding? But I think it doesn't match human psychology because people always speed between each red because they're frustraited after waiting at the previous red and desperately trying to get the next green. If they set it up so you'd get greens if you go 50 rather than 60-70 it would improve flow and curb speeding. All the lights are for much more minor roads too, this is the main access in and out of the city so I don't know why it doesn't have timing priority.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:There's a whole political agenda going on behind the scenes, and there is so much more than transportation involved. I really don't want to get blackballed, though, so I'll have to keep my mouth shut. That surprisingly answers the question pretty well, thanks. Zodijackylite fucked around with this message at 23:51 on Jun 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:There's a whole political agenda going on behind the scenes, and there is so much more than transportation involved. I really don't want to get blackballed, though, so I'll have to keep my mouth shut.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 01:35
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:They're privatizing the entire state and selling it to Saudi Arabia, aren't they? Wait, how did you know???
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 03:18
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Wait, how did you know???
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 03:24
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:They're privatizing the entire state and selling it to Saudi Arabia, aren't they? Well Saudi Arabia is all desert, so it should be no problem to add extra lanes to all roads.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 08:46
|
|
|
The state had a members-only meeting about tolling, since they're pushing it pretty hard. Check out the comments. http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-connecticut-tolls-0609-20140609,0,7082481.story How can so many people be so right for exactly the wrong reasons?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 12:21
|
|
|
I thought all you had to do was bring up the specter of the Turnpike Crash to kill tolling in Connecticut. But if you toll 95, where exactly is the traffic going to go? Certainly not on route 1, and you can't put trucks on the Merritt.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 14:50
|
|
|
kefkafloyd posted:I thought all you had to do was bring up the specter of the Turnpike Crash to kill tolling in Connecticut. Now they can collect tolls without toll plazas! But I agree that I'm not sure what the point is. Are there really that many people driving on 95 during the peak periods that could take alternate routes?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
Presumably they want more people to take the Metro-North but even that is starting to get crowded in terms of capacity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 21:29
|
|
|
kefkafloyd posted:Presumably they want more people to take the Metro-North but even that is starting to get crowded in terms of capacity. Doesn't help that its bridges keep failing and taking the entire line out of service, eh? The reason for tolling is very simple: revenue. The toll operators are private companies and they want more money, they have powerful lobbyists who try to get tolls put in everywhere (even when the municipality loses money on the deal). The state hears a promise of free money and completely ignores the strings attached, like whether the system will even pay for itself, let alone for additional improvements. And of course, nobody bothers to think about how it'll affect low-income commuters, because gently caress the poor.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
Well, on the topic of tolling, transit and infrastructure funding, there's an interesting and ongoing showdown between local and provincial government in British Columbia. In the provincial elections last year, the BC Liberals' leader, Christy Clark, made an election promise to hold a referendum on any new funding streams for public transit. It was pretty clear from the context that it was a "no new taxes, no how" kind of promise, and at the same time the BC Liberals have been starving Translink (the government-held corporation running the Province's public transit). Meanwhile, the mayors of the municipalities making up Metro Vancouver are making GBS threads themselves as the metro keeps growing and tons of transit-centric new development is happening while the province (under the BC Liberals) has been effectively cutting transit funding. Anyway, since the referendum proposal was stupid and poorly thought out to begin with, our provincial Minister of Transportation shirked off the responsibility of coming up with a plan for people to vote on to the mayors (despite transit being a provincial, not municipal, responsibility). Yesterday, the mayors published that plan, and it's already full of compromises and far from adequate, but under the threat of a public referendum on a new tax (like that would ever pass anywhere in North America in today's political climate), that's what you get. http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Metro+Vancouver+mayors+look+tolls+carbon+fund+billion+transit/9932710/story.html http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/rejects+Metro+Vancouver+mayors+plan+carbon+help+fund+billion+transit+boost/9932710/story.html The proposed revenue source is "mobility pricing", which I believe will take the form of tolls (mainly on bridges), but could be levied in other ways? In fact, they're talking about cutting gas taxes at the same time, to sweeten the deal to the public. They also wanted to take some money out of carbon taxes (a provincial income-based tax), but the province said no. Anyway, I think tolls can be less gently caress-the-poors when they're used to fund cheaper means of transportation, like public transit, cycling and walking infrastructure. They also seem to be a viable means of achieving transportation demand management?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
How would a situation like this be marked? Simple 2 lane road that goes under a bridge. The black bars show the weird staggered bridge supports because the bridge is on a really shallow angle. So basically each lane turns into its own little tunnel. The yellow lines are existing, but would I put some stripes within the yellow triangles and if so what direction would they go? And obviously I'd add the little \\\\ and //// keep left/right stripe signs on the bridge supports them selves. Any other signs or safety features? Would the bridge support have a guard rail or anything? The space is already kinda tight. The bridge support isn't just a flat concrete wall, it's a big series of angled iron supports. Here's a bad pictures from a bad angle. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 18:01
|
|
|
Here's an example from near my Wife's favorite pizza place. https://www.google.com/maps/@41.564768,-87.667231,3a,75y,123.68h,69.32t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1szAAb9FBErJVdDppQyUlmmg!2e0
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 19:10
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:How would a situation like this be marked? We have a bunch of these in Chicago. Typically there would just be a Keep Right sign mounted on the center support, and maybe a very short (and useless) guard rail at the end.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 20:09
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:How would a situation like this be marked? This isn't quite the same, since the street going under has a cross street, but take a look around this intersection underneath an elevated rail line with supports going down in the middle of the main road: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.968816,-75.136107,3a,75y,327.09h,77.47t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sqVD01FRBwXtSJVGMhHW5uA!2e0 It does happen to also have trolley tracks and associated stops in the road on either end of the elevated section there. And short curbed piers sticking out in front of the columns to hold street lights, but simultaneously deflecting crashes into the supports. Also, check out the markings and crash buffer used when the lanes on each side split to make room for the trolley platforms. Incidentally, it'd probably better for your yellow markings to be symmetric, that is instead of your current layout having one lane apparently pass straight through while the other dips to the side a bit, have both dip to the side a bit. Nintendo Kid fucked around with this message at 20:23 on Jun 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 20:21
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:How would a situation like this be marked? This is exactly what you want: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part3/fig3b_15_1_longdesc.htm
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:This is exactly what you want: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part3/fig3b_15_1_longdesc.htm Your link won't load for me, but I found a pretty close example. http://goo.gl/maps/jadTb Not sure what the yellow diamond on top is about though, generic construction? The rest seems obvious though. One sign says "hey your 2 lane road is about to get a median in the form of a bridge" and the lower sign says "please don't drive into this, preferably by driving to the right of it" Baronjutter fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Jun 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Your link won't load for me, but I found a pretty close example. The yellow diamond is just "hey look here's a thing, maybe with this yellow dealie you will notice it better" The middle sign is "stay to the right, this is a median" The bottom sign is "this is a bad thing to drive into, the angle of these dashes will tend to make you want to stay right of it" Also that's Canada, so technically they don't follow the US MUTCD, but it looks like most of their signs are similar Edit: I hope this is for a school project and this isn't how Nebraska subs out their engineering design
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
Baron is also Canadian though, so the MUTCD probably doesn't need to be zealously followed. Of course I can't speak for the railway he's building. e: Here's a similar situation in down town Calgary. https://www.google.ca/maps/@51.043703,-114.065707,3a,75y,32.49h,77.04t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sEbBeBNKf3vgnMYdOvdiAmg!2e0 PittTheElder fucked around with this message at 00:14 on Jun 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 00:11
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Baronjutter posted:Your link won't load for me, but I found a pretty close example. This is more of what you're talking about, no? Something with a little more angle, and a bit less safe without the attenuator.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 00:26
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Baron is also Canadian though, so the MUTCD probably doesn't need to be zealously followed. Of course I can't speak for the railway he's building. Yeah he'd be looking for the TAC guidelines. Unfortunately, unlike the American guidelines, you have to pay (through your nose) for a copy of those. http://tac-atc.ca/en/bookstore-and-resources/bookstore E: The BC supplement is free, though: http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/publications/eng_publications/geomet/TAC/TAC.htm#chapters Here's the chapter you want for maximum local authenticity: http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/publications/eng_publications/geomet/TAC/TAC_2007_Supplement/Ch1100-2007.pdf Lead out in cuffs fucked around with this message at 01:57 on Jun 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 20:14 |
|
|
That King St. tunnel/bridge is almost the exact situation as my situation, and yep nothing but a keep left and some stripes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 01:57
|
|