AARoads Forum

National Boards => General Highway Talk => Traffic Control => Topic started by: Brian556 on January 07, 2012, 09:50:51 PM

Title: Sign deterioration rate variations
Post by: Brian556 on January 07, 2012, 09:50:51 PM
I'm wondering just how much difference there is in the rate of sign deterioration in different areas of the United States.

I've noticed a pic of an Alaska state route marker from the 60's on somebody's site that is still standing and in good condition. Signs could never last that long in Texas. I remember in 2007, I replaced route marker signs that were installed in 1992, and they were brown and crackled.

I also noticed that signs facing south deteriorate far faster, becasue they get more sunlight. I have a couple of street name blades that are horribly deteriorated on one side, but are in good shape on the other.
Title: Re: Sign deterioration rate variations
Post by: xcellntbuy on January 07, 2012, 10:40:31 PM
When I lived in New York, signs lasted a very long time.  It is still not unusual to find some older fonts and cracked, yellowing paint on some lesser travelled state route shields.  I would not be surprised that some signs in New York are at least 50 years old.

In Florida, signs that face south or west are literally baked in the sun.  Signs with red paint, like parking restriction signs, "Do Not Enter" and the red part of Interstate shields fade much quicker.  Blue bleached brigher blue.  Green signs tend to streak from rain and can either darken from the streaks or bleach a faded green.
Title: Re: Sign deterioration rate variations
Post by: Brian556 on January 07, 2012, 10:58:31 PM
QuoteSigns with red paint, like parking restriction signs, "Do Not Enter" and the red part of Interstate shields fade much quicker.

I've noticed that the lifespan of signs with red ink varies greatly due to quality differences.
There is a STOP sign at the Target where I work that is less than 10 years old, and it's completely faded out. TxDOT's red ink is much better, and it's STOP/DO NOT ENTER signs that were installed in 2000 are just now showing a hint of fading.
Title: Re: Sign deterioration rate variations
Post by: Takumi on January 07, 2012, 11:16:27 PM
At the I-95/VA 144 interchange there's a stop sign at a former Texaco (now a Kangaroo) facing south that was installed when the gas station opened in about 1990 that's completely faded out and has been so for at least 10 years. Meanwhile, some of the I-95 and 85 shields there that date back to the 80s (with covered TOLL banners over the 95 shields) that are in great shape, even the red parts. One of the shield sets faces west and two face east, but both are close to trees.
Title: Re: Sign deterioration rate variations
Post by: Ian on January 07, 2012, 11:40:27 PM
Quote from: xcellntbuy on January 07, 2012, 10:40:31 PM
When I lived in New York, signs lasted a very long time.  It is still not unusual to find some older fonts and cracked, yellowing paint on some lesser travelled state route shields.  I would not be surprised that some signs in New York are at least 50 years old.

New York I've noticed slacks on sign replacement sometimes. It's both good and bad; bad being that some are so faded and beat up that you can't read them at night, but good being that you can see signs like these still out in the field...

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm6.staticflickr.com%2F5170%2F5310157373_1e1511085f_z.jpg&hash=4abd69b27e8dc5eac3c22186602cdd74b16754f2)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.staticflickr.com%2F2568%2F4142082761_9e5683d9a1_z.jpg&hash=54c40d021e69d90b6c023d1f2c69a744f4b7f4b8)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm6.staticflickr.com%2F5209%2F5340958667_e22c272863_z.jpg&hash=58ab428db04abeb728669e384a8039fe892ef623)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm7.staticflickr.com%2F6021%2F6002320389_f3cfb9583b_z.jpg&hash=38d8156840241a7aefaaa37baa88a660a243ce48)
Title: Re: Sign deterioration rate variations
Post by: hbelkins on January 08, 2012, 04:02:13 PM
One thing I've noticed is that in some places where signs face north and never get any sun, they get covered by moss.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm7.staticflickr.com%2F6216%2F6276459410_2cf5c2243b.jpg&hash=bd658fb75ff26ab9e37abb20f876a6096ca72862)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2Fsigns%2526sights%2Fwv%2Fmcdowell%2FJctWV83-EndWV80.jpg&hash=b408d92b0f32cfe864309e160739f8806bdadcd0)
Title: Re: Sign deterioration rate variations
Post by: Brian556 on January 08, 2012, 04:34:08 PM
QuoteOne thing I've noticed is that in some places where signs face north and never get any sun, they get covered by moss.
I've seen this in Tennesse, but not Texas.
Title: Re: Sign deterioration rate variations
Post by: US71 on January 09, 2012, 01:09:58 PM
Quote from: Brian556 on January 08, 2012, 04:34:08 PM
QuoteOne thing I've noticed is that in some places where signs face north and never get any sun, they get covered by moss.
I've seen this in Tennesse, but not Texas.

Arkansas has a few
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm2.staticflickr.com%2F1093%2F5143851589_8340c139a9_z_d.jpg&hash=665410abe6d1818e4f16b7302c1103712b8be96e)

Then sometimes you get some that have been neglected:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.staticflickr.com%2F2342%2F2285231014_2b2f603d9a_z_d.jpg%3Fzz%3D1&hash=ea33888d05626322a1bc205da2b62ff09299c35d)

Of course, Missouri does the same thing:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.staticflickr.com%2F3009%2F2626741334_367bb4c20c_d.jpg&hash=9d9b1b27af2c76b36e7c7c5396b2dbaa85debe05)

Title: Re: Sign deterioration rate variations
Post by: Alps on January 14, 2012, 10:04:22 PM
I'm trying to get confirmation, but it's possible that signs in Arizona installed in 2000 (the last button copy in the country) already have badly cracking sign backgrounds, while other much older signs, especially overpass signs (non-reflective, 70s?) are just fine.
Title: Re: Sign deterioration rate variations
Post by: US71 on January 15, 2012, 12:47:53 AM
Quote from: The Situation™ on January 14, 2012, 10:04:22 PM
I'm trying to get confirmation, but it's possible that signs in Arizona installed in 2000 (the last button copy in the country) already have badly cracking sign backgrounds, while other much older signs, especially overpass signs (non-reflective, 70s?) are just fine.

Arkansas just replaced a bunch of signs on I-540, many of which were 10-12-years old. Yet there are signs on the Ft Smith segment of 540 that are older and in better condition.
Title: Re: Sign deterioration rate variations
Post by: oscar on January 15, 2012, 01:06:33 AM
Quote from: Brian556 on January 07, 2012, 09:50:51 PMI've noticed a pic of an Alaska state route marker from the 60's on somebody's site that is still standing and in good condition. Signs could never last that long in Texas.

I'm really curious where is that old Alaska sign.  At least in rural areas of Alaska, it seems like hunters love to use route markers for target practice, which does them in (or leaves them standing but pockmarked with bullet holes) before they would die or deteriorate from natural causes.  True, my avatar is based on a photo of an actual rural Alaska route marker; but I took that photo in part because intact Alaska route markers were unusual out in the country.
Title: Re: Sign deterioration rate variations
Post by: ctsignguy on January 15, 2012, 08:18:32 AM
Quote from: oscar on January 15, 2012, 01:06:33 AM
Quote from: Brian556 on January 07, 2012, 09:50:51 PMI've noticed a pic of an Alaska state route marker from the 60's on somebody's site that is still standing and in good condition. Signs could never last that long in Texas.

I'm really curious where is that old Alaska sign.  At least in rural areas of Alaska, it seems like hunters love to use route markers for target practice, which does them in (or leaves them standing but pockmarked with bullet holes) before they would die or deteriorate from natural causes.  True, my avatar is based on a photo of an actual rural Alaska route marker; but I took that photo in part because intact Alaska route markers were unusual out in the country.

you mean this one?

www.aaroads.com/shields/show.php?image=AK19620031&view=3
Title: Re: Sign deterioration rate variations
Post by: RJ145 on February 28, 2012, 06:55:44 PM
I've got an adopt a highway sign from  AZ that is fairly cracked from being out in the sun. Although unfortunately there is no ADOT sticker on it which would show when it was installed.

Here is a sample pic:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.adoptahwy.com%2Fimages%2Farizona.jpg&hash=b080f6452fb042f0cb50ccdfd77c7b1963ce1a68)
Title: Re: Sign deterioration rate variations
Post by: mjb2002 on June 09, 2012, 04:35:58 PM
Signs in SC rarely last longer than a 14-year-old dog. Regulatory and warning signs do, on occasion, last longer than 14 years. Guide signs (except Street Name) can last up to 35 years in extreme cases. Street Name signs in SC do not last any longer than ten years - regardless of where they are facing. In Orangeburg County, some Street Name signs have not been changed since The Beatles broke up - the signs are no longer readable and have not been for over a decade.