AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)  (Read 38070 times)

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 36
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #75 on: August 09, 2010, 11:42:34 PM »

Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 22, 2010, 09:13:13 AM
the 3di shield is a tad pointy compared to the 2di shield, but the bubble shield overcompensates for that by maybe a factor of five.  Keeping circular arcs, and moving the top outer points in by about a quarter to a half inch (on a 30x25 inch blank) should be sufficient. 

see the 30x25 shield shape, as opposed to the 21x18 or 42x36, then.
Logged

US71

  • Road Scholar , Master of Snark
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6487
  • Sign Inspector

  • Age: 57
  • Location: The Knowne World
  • Last Login: November 13, 2017, 03:42:51 PM
    • The Road Less Taken
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #76 on: August 10, 2010, 08:59:20 AM »


Voila!  A hideous angular interstate shield.


I thought maybe those were made by Underwood's Deviled Ham  :D
Logged
In search of the road less taken...
and the perfect pizza.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/us_71/

myosh_tino

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2575
  • Silicon Valley Roadgeek

  • Age: 43
  • Location: Cupertino, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:48:35 AM
    • Silicon Valley Roads @ Markyville.com
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #77 on: August 10, 2010, 01:35:32 PM »

Seeing if I could make a "bubble" shield, I took a standard 2-digit interstate shield and stretch it horizontally to the width of a 3-digit shield you'll get...

Voila #2!  A hideous bubble interstate shield.
I should have mentioned in that particular post that California only used the bubble shield on guide signs.  While it appears the use of bubble shields on guide signs has stopped (thankfully), they're now using them for route markers (reassurance markers) on southbound I-680 between CA-238/Mission Blvd and Auto Mall Pkwy... ugh! :banghead:

I don't have a picture as of yet but plan on getting one soon.
Logged
Quote from: golden eagle
If I owned a dam and decided to donate it to charity, would I be giving a dam? I'm sure that might be a first because no one really gives a dam.

LeftyJR

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 124
  • Last Login: Today at 07:11:38 AM
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #78 on: August 10, 2010, 02:00:47 PM »

Hey I gotta ask this, what do we call a 3di shield with a 2di number inside like this one?

(though, this shield covers I-495, so this one can't help it)

We call it a "cute shield"...a former GF saw my 18x21 VT I-91 years ago and called it 'cute'....
I call it ugly - Mass has em for I-95 all over - and they're friggin HUGE!!!!

I think this section used to be I-495, and they just slapped a 95 over it!
Logged

Bickendan

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2170
  • Last Login: November 17, 2017, 03:37:09 PM
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #79 on: August 10, 2010, 04:07:42 PM »

That's what the pic's caption says!
Logged

LeftyJR

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 124
  • Last Login: Today at 07:11:38 AM
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #80 on: August 10, 2010, 05:21:10 PM »

That's what the pic's caption says!

DUH!!  I am not paying attention!
Logged

Duke87

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4783
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Queens, NY
  • Last Login: November 17, 2017, 10:18:47 PM
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #81 on: August 22, 2010, 09:18:28 PM »



The 279 is a bubble shield like any other, but what the hell is up with the 376?
Logged
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

Bickendan

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2170
  • Last Login: November 17, 2017, 03:37:09 PM
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #82 on: August 22, 2010, 09:58:48 PM »

It's trying to make bubble shields palatable!
Logged

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10816
  • Celebrating another day that Hillary isn't prez.

  • Age: 55
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: November 17, 2017, 11:02:24 PM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #83 on: August 22, 2010, 10:44:37 PM »

Having learned that the "bubble shield" is actually what a normal two-digit Interstate shield looks like when it is stretched proportionally, I officially can say I prefer the bubble shield to the "regular" 3di shield, which when compacted to two-digit size, looks like the head of a shovel and can be found on a few overheads in the OKC area.
Logged

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 36
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #84 on: August 22, 2010, 10:49:28 PM »

Having learned that the "bubble shield" is actually what a normal two-digit Interstate shield looks like when it is stretched proportionally, I officially can say I prefer the bubble shield to the "regular" 3di shield, which when compacted to two-digit size, looks like the head of a shovel and can be found on a few overheads in the OKC area.

it's all over California, and when distorted looks utterly hideous.

the best 3-digit interstate shield shape is the classic 21x18/42x36.

Logged

myosh_tino

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2575
  • Silicon Valley Roadgeek

  • Age: 43
  • Location: Cupertino, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:48:35 AM
    • Silicon Valley Roads @ Markyville.com
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #85 on: August 23, 2010, 01:45:23 AM »



I should have mentioned in that particular post that California only used the bubble shield on guide signs.  While it appears the use of bubble shields on guide signs has stopped (thankfully), they're now using them for route markers (reassurance markers) on southbound I-680 between CA-238/Mission Blvd and Auto Mall Pkwy... ugh! :banghead:

I don't have a picture as of yet but plan on getting one soon.
Here is a picture of the I-680 bubble shield I snapped with my phone.  This shield is located just after the Washington Blvd exit.

All I can say is I hope this is not an indication of what future 3-digit interstate shields in California are going to look like but if it is...  :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
Logged
Quote from: golden eagle
If I owned a dam and decided to donate it to charity, would I be giving a dam? I'm sure that might be a first because no one really gives a dam.

cu2010

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 453
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Almost Canada
  • Last Login: Today at 08:49:46 AM
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #86 on: August 23, 2010, 02:45:46 AM »

*279/376 construction sign*

The 279 is a bubble shield like any other, but what the hell is up with the 376?

The 376 appears to be some form of horrendous combination between the normal 3di shield and the bubble shield- the crown looks like it's from a bubble shield while the rest of it is standard.
Logged
This is cu2010, reminding you, help control the ugly sign population, don't have your shields spayed or neutered.

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3140
  • Last Login: November 17, 2017, 07:19:03 PM
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #87 on: August 23, 2010, 11:33:35 AM »



I should have mentioned in that particular post that California only used the bubble shield on guide signs.  While it appears the use of bubble shields on guide signs has stopped (thankfully), they're now using them for route markers (reassurance markers) on southbound I-680 between CA-238/Mission Blvd and Auto Mall Pkwy... ugh! :banghead:

I don't have a picture as of yet but plan on getting one soon.
Here is a picture of the I-680 bubble shield I snapped with my phone.  This shield is located just after the Washington Blvd exit.
http://www.markyville.com/aaroads/680bubble.jpg
All I can say is I hope this is not an indication of what future 3-digit interstate shields in California are going to look like but if it is...  :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

I saw a bubble 280 shield yesterday somewhere in Daly City or whereabouts, but appeared to be city-installed on a detour route, without a state name...

On the other hand, I think the following sign is one or two years old and shows CalTrans returning to late-1950s 3di shapes!


The bubble shields I'm most familiar with in NorCal are for 580 and 880 at the MacArthur Maze, of which the examples can be counted on about one hand.
Logged
Chris Sampang

Quillz

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2488
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Last Login: October 04, 2017, 01:25:53 AM
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #88 on: August 31, 2010, 04:07:14 AM »

I'm guessing this is a bubble shield:


I think they need to make the Alabama 150 shield bigger, I can barely see it.

Also, are bubble shields officially defined by the MUTCD, or are they just modifications that are frowned upon but allowed?
Logged
US Highways: 1 / 2 / 6 / 12 / 14 / 16 / 18 / 20 / 26 / 30 / 50 / 64 / 66 / 84 / 85 / 87 / 91 / 93 / 95 / 97 / 99 / 101 / 189 / 191 / 201 / 285 / 287 / 385 / 395
Interstate Highways: 5 / 10 / 15 / 17 / 25 / 40 / 45 / 70 / 80 / 84 / 89 / 90 / 93 / 95

J N Winkler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5317
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas/Oxford, Great Britain
  • Last Login: Today at 11:50:50 AM
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #89 on: August 31, 2010, 04:24:04 AM »

Also, are bubble shields officially defined by the MUTCD, or are they just modifications that are frowned upon but allowed?

The MUTCD allows only Interstate shields which have square or 5:4 aspect ratios.  A number of states, including California, have their own designs of Interstate shield which may be used in certain contexts and do not necessarily have square or 5:4 aspect ratios--for instance, California has a 21" x 18" size that can be used on certain G-series guide signs (aspect ratio:  7:6).  These are tolerated and are generally considered aesthetically satisfying because the exterior curved segments are true circular curves.

The error bubble shields, which nobody likes, and which nobody with any pride in his or her work will use, do not have true circular curves in their exterior segments because they were produced by inappropriately stretching the correct designs either horizontally or vertically.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 36
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #90 on: August 31, 2010, 11:49:36 AM »

The MUTCD allows only Interstate shields which have square or 5:4 aspect ratios.

I thought the 42x36 size was still explicitly allowed?  I am not familiar with the '70 and '78 MUTCDs - I know the '61 allowed 21x18, 30x25, and 42x36 for the wide set and I thought the '70 got rid of only the 21x18.

Quote
A number of states, including California, have their own designs of Interstate shield which may be used in certain contexts and do not necessarily have square or 5:4 aspect ratios--for instance, California has a 21" x 18" size that can be used on certain G-series guide signs (aspect ratio:  7:6).  These are tolerated and are generally considered aesthetically satisfying because the exterior curved segments are true circular curves.

that is the '61 federal standard.  it was abolished officially by '70, but some states kept it.  California still has it as part of their repertoire, but that is because they have not updated their shield standards since 1971.  And bless their hearts for it!

every so often, a brand new 21x18 shield pops up.  



I for one find them significantly better-looking than the 30x25.  



the problem with the 30x25 is that it specifies 8" numbers, which would go with a 24, not 25 inch shield to be proportionate with the 21x18 and 42x36 (and the 18x18, 24x24, 36x36!)  the extra inch of space has to be distributed somewhere, and it is especially easy to make a goofy shield by getting the placements just slightly wrong.  that 105 is about the best you can do, and here is about the worst:



that shield also suffers from the manufacturing defect of the red crown tab being placed too high and slightly askew, but its main concern is the excess of space between state name and number.

of course, turning to the wrong page of the 1961 AASHO manual and using the wrong crown height exaggerates the problem even further, but this is not a standard shield anymore.



that layout with the shorter crown is to be used for a neutered shield on a green sign, with 10" numbers on the 25" blank.  You can even note a mounting hole at upper right of this shield, as though it were originally manufactured as intended: to be bolted to a green sign by the outer points.

I've always wondered why the '61 spec went with 30x25 instead of the extremely logical choice of 28x24, to be slotted in between 21x18 and 42x36.  
« Last Edit: August 31, 2010, 11:53:02 AM by agentsteel53 »
Logged

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 36
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #91 on: August 31, 2010, 11:56:47 AM »

Also, are bubble shields officially defined by the MUTCD, or are they just modifications that are frowned upon but allowed?

endorsements by the MUTCD do not imply quality in any form.  note the '70 spec US shield that I posted yesterday (which has been the standard since 1971, no wonder it's everywhere like the plague!) and also the interstate shields from that year look terrible compared to the '57 and '61 specs - state named is passable, but the neutered ones are just awful.



I'd rather see a '61 spec bubble shield.



there, I've said it.
Logged

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3140
  • Last Login: November 17, 2017, 07:19:03 PM
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #92 on: August 31, 2010, 12:39:29 PM »

Also, are bubble shields officially defined by the MUTCD, or are they just modifications that are frowned upon but allowed?

endorsements by the MUTCD do not imply quality in any form.  note the '70 spec US shield that I posted yesterday (which has been the standard since 1971, no wonder it's everywhere like the plague!)


As of the 2003 MUTCD, was the state name mandated, or merely recommended, for Interstate shields?
Logged
Chris Sampang

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 36
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #93 on: August 31, 2010, 12:41:02 PM »


As of the 2003 MUTCD, was the state name mandated, or merely recommended, for Interstate shields?

neither.  it's optional.
Logged

Quillz

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2488
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Last Login: October 04, 2017, 01:25:53 AM
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #94 on: August 31, 2010, 12:42:22 PM »

EDIT: Had a change of heart. Now I like 3di shields the best.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2011, 02:08:21 AM by Quillz »
Logged
US Highways: 1 / 2 / 6 / 12 / 14 / 16 / 18 / 20 / 26 / 30 / 50 / 64 / 66 / 84 / 85 / 87 / 91 / 93 / 95 / 97 / 99 / 101 / 189 / 191 / 201 / 285 / 287 / 385 / 395
Interstate Highways: 5 / 10 / 15 / 17 / 25 / 40 / 45 / 70 / 80 / 84 / 89 / 90 / 93 / 95

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 36
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #95 on: August 31, 2010, 12:52:24 PM »

Off-topic, but I'm really not a fan of bubble or 3di shields at all. I've always preferred to just see three-digit numbers shrunk down to fit a standard two-digit Interstate shield.

I tend to think most wide shields are hideous - especially those like Arkansas and Alabama that distort the state outline to ridiculous proportions.

the only standard wide shields I like are two that appear in the 1961 MUTCD: the 21x18/42x36 interstate, and the 28x24 "California style" US cutout.  (I also like the 1930s Mass and NY US three-digit shields, but those were never standardized.)



now THAT is a good-looking wide shield!
Logged

J N Winkler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5317
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas/Oxford, Great Britain
  • Last Login: Today at 11:50:50 AM
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #96 on: August 31, 2010, 12:52:57 PM »

The MUTCD allows only Interstate shields which have square or 5:4 aspect ratios.

I thought the 42x36 size was still explicitly allowed?  I am not familiar with the '70 and '78 MUTCDs - I know the '61 allowed 21x18, 30x25, and 42x36 for the wide set and I thought the '70 got rid of only the 21x18.

I can't talk about any MUTCD edition before 2000 with certainty, but I am not aware of any recent MUTCD which has allowed off-square other than 5:4.  2003 does not, 2009 does not, etc. (just checked).  Even the specification for post-interchange distance signs requires 22.5" x 18" (5:4) for three-digit routes when shields instead of text designations are used on such signs (many states don't bother).
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3140
  • Last Login: November 17, 2017, 07:19:03 PM
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #97 on: August 31, 2010, 01:32:27 PM »

Off-topic, but I'm really not a fan of bubble or 3di shields at all. I've always preferred to just see three-digit numbers shrunk down to fit a standard two-digit Interstate shield.

Here's one of my favorite 3di-in-2di shield examples:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/4801461694/sizes/o/in/set-72157624519667042/
Logged
Chris Sampang

Quillz

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2488
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Last Login: October 04, 2017, 01:25:53 AM
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #98 on: August 31, 2010, 01:45:15 PM »

Off-topic, but I'm really not a fan of bubble or 3di shields at all. I've always preferred to just see three-digit numbers shrunk down to fit a standard two-digit Interstate shield.

Here's one of my favorite 3di-in-2di shield examples:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/4801461694/sizes/o/in/set-72157624519667042/
Yeah, that's how California does 3di shields for the most part. Every I-405 shield I've ever seen has looked like that. CalTRANS loves Series D... They shrink it down for everything rather than using Series C.
Logged
US Highways: 1 / 2 / 6 / 12 / 14 / 16 / 18 / 20 / 26 / 30 / 50 / 64 / 66 / 84 / 85 / 87 / 91 / 93 / 95 / 97 / 99 / 101 / 189 / 191 / 201 / 285 / 287 / 385 / 395
Interstate Highways: 5 / 10 / 15 / 17 / 25 / 40 / 45 / 70 / 80 / 84 / 89 / 90 / 93 / 95

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3140
  • Last Login: November 17, 2017, 07:19:03 PM
Re: 3di shields: Bubble vs. standard (non-CalTrans)
« Reply #99 on: August 31, 2010, 01:51:28 PM »

Yeah, that's how California does 3di shields for the most part. Every I-405 shield I've ever seen has looked like that. CalTRANS loves Series D... They shrink it down for everything rather than using Series C.

Here's a recent Series C sign, I think:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/4807126693/in/set-72157624519667042/
Logged
Chris Sampang

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.