AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Traffic signal  (Read 299561 times)

bcroadguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10
  • Age: 19
  • Location: BC
  • Last Login: Today at 05:30:47 AM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1625 on: May 10, 2018, 11:26:33 PM »

Two-section pedestrian heads are still commonly installed in various parts of British Columbia. They have been phased out in Washington, though.

And weirdly, some areas have switched from 16 inch pedestrian signals back to two-section signals in recent years.

Yeah, I'm not quite sure what the MOT is doing. Some new projects have the standard single-section pedestrian heads, whereas some will have two sections. None seem to be a newer style than another. They're both installed with regularity.

MOT only ever installs 12 inch pedestrian signals. For new signals at least, they'll only add a second section if there's going to be a countdown timer. Many cities (Surrey, Langley, Victoria, Vancouver etc..) install 16 inch signals, while others (Burnaby Coquitlam, Nanaimo etc...) are like the MOT and use 12 inch signals. It all depends on whichever agency is installing them's preference.

I believe Vancouver installs single-section heads which also include countdown timers, correct? I can't remember what other cities do. At the 99/16 Ave interchange, the MOT used two-section heads despite the availability of single-section pedestrian heads with countdown timers. That's what I find most interesting. I was not aware that any municipality was still installing ped heads without countdown timers.

They do! All the other cities in the first list in my previous comment do as well. As far as I know, only the MOT and Richmond don't always use countdown timers. Here's a brand new 12 inch pedestrian signal in Richmond without countdown timers: https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.1774636,-123.1243457,3a,45.3y,15.24h,97.96t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1skqOlZqyAKaVca4T0bh09_Q!2e0!5s20120501T000000!7i13312!8i6656.
Logged

TBKS1

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 388
  • Central Arkansas Native

  • Age: 15
  • Location: Little Rock, Arkansas
  • Last Login: August 17, 2018, 08:09:14 PM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1626 on: May 11, 2018, 04:34:59 PM »

Hartshorne, Oklahoma. I took these yesterday.



^^ This signal was broken, unfortunately.

Logged
I'm a nice guy... I swear.

traffic light guy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 476
  • Traffic Signal Enthusiast of Pennsylvania

  • Location: Pennsylvania
  • Last Login: Today at 01:32:44 AM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1627 on: May 11, 2018, 05:18:03 PM »

Hartshorne, Oklahoma. I took these yesterday.



^^ This signal was broken, unfortunately.



The first one may be a McCain, the second one might be an 8" Peek
Logged

TBKS1

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 388
  • Central Arkansas Native

  • Age: 15
  • Location: Little Rock, Arkansas
  • Last Login: August 17, 2018, 08:09:14 PM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1628 on: May 11, 2018, 05:25:19 PM »

Hartshorne, Oklahoma. I took these yesterday.



^^ This signal was broken, unfortunately.



The first one may be a McCain, the second one might be an 8" Peek

Thanks for telling me what the models are!
Logged
I'm a nice guy... I swear.

freebrickproductions

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2127
  • The traffic signal enthusiast for north Alabama.

  • Age: -6982
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
  • Last Login: August 14, 2018, 05:43:07 PM
    • Mike's Railroad Crossing Website
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1629 on: May 11, 2018, 07:32:25 PM »

Hard to tell, but they both look to be 8 inch McCains. Doesn't sound like the town really takes good care of them...
Logged
It's all fun & games until someone summons Cthulhu and brings about the end of the world.

I also collect traffic lights, road signs, fans, and railroad crossing equipment.

TBKS1

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 388
  • Central Arkansas Native

  • Age: 15
  • Location: Little Rock, Arkansas
  • Last Login: August 17, 2018, 08:09:14 PM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1630 on: May 11, 2018, 10:19:31 PM »

Hard to tell, but they both look to be 8 inch McCains. Doesn't sound like the town really takes good care of them...

I don't think they do either. It's pretty hard to see the green color on the signal, and as I mentioned above, the first signal is broken and needs to be replaced pretty badly.
Logged
I'm a nice guy... I swear.

traffic light guy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 476
  • Traffic Signal Enthusiast of Pennsylvania

  • Location: Pennsylvania
  • Last Login: Today at 01:32:44 AM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1631 on: May 11, 2018, 11:11:22 PM »

Not even that old either, I believe those signals date to the mid-90s.
Logged

Michael

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 889
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Auburn, NY
  • Last Login: August 14, 2018, 09:35:29 PM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1632 on: May 14, 2018, 07:56:03 PM »

This video showed up in YouTube's suggestions earlier (I don't know why since I haven't been watching any road related videos), and I just watched it:

It was quite informative.  I've never seen heated LED lenses before.  I also agree with the point that he makes about the right green arrow delay.  It's annoying to have a green ball go to a red ball, then get an arrow.  The only intersection I can think of this happening to me at is here.
Logged

paulthemapguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3087
  • Beeeeees?

  • Age: 28
  • Location: Illinois
  • Last Login: August 17, 2018, 12:55:35 AM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1633 on: May 14, 2018, 08:17:21 PM »

Lmao I know the exact intersection where he went out to take pictures.

LEDs are sooooooooo much better than incandescent bulbs, though I am nostalgic for the incandescent bulbs' appearance.
The buildup of snow on traffic signal visors is very very rare.  It requires a lot of wind to accompany the snowfall.  But visors in his (and my) home state of Illinois have the bottoms cut out anyway, so the snow build up only ever happens if the wind is blowing side-to side.  In the rare occurrences when I've seen snow build up on the lenses, it would be either the left or right half of the lens that is covered; never really the bottom half.
Logged
My life is a collect-a-thon. Like Banjo Kazooie but IRL.
Avatar is the last significant highway I clinched.

My goal:  A shield photo for every Interstate and US Hwy, plus three state hwys from each state!
Shield collection: https://flic.kr/s/aHskHbf8zR
Originals: https://flic.kr/s/aHskFU42pF

SignBridge

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1134
  • Location: Long Island, New York
  • Last Login: August 17, 2018, 10:06:30 PM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1634 on: May 14, 2018, 08:29:18 PM »

Snow buildup is a more serious problem where I live on Long Island because our county traffic agency mostly uses partial visors which allow more snow to accumulate on the lenses.
Logged

MNHighwayMan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2820
  • Blue and gold forever!

  • Age: 26
  • Location: Des Moines
  • Last Login: Today at 07:41:28 AM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1635 on: May 14, 2018, 08:31:21 PM »

I also agree with the point that he makes about the right green arrow delay.  It's annoying to have a green ball go to a red ball, then get an arrow.

I don't, because this means that the signal never has an all-red phase, where the intersection should be completely clear of vehicles from all directions.
Logged

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8105
  • U/Wash - Urban Design

  • Age: 22
  • Location: BC / Tacoma, Wash
  • Last Login: Today at 03:02:55 AM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1636 on: May 14, 2018, 09:57:11 PM »

I also agree with the point that he makes about the right green arrow delay.  It's annoying to have a green ball go to a red ball, then get an arrow.

The green arrow can't come on while the oncoming left turn has a green or yellow orb. This would give the impression to right turning traffic that no other traffic might conflict with them, when, in fact, left turning traffic will be completing their left turn on yellow/red. Basically, on a yellow, all straight/right turning traffic must slow and stop to allow left turning traffic to go.
Logged

on_wisconsin

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 586
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Der Bierstaat
  • Last Login: July 29, 2018, 08:23:50 AM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1637 on: May 16, 2018, 02:07:15 PM »

WisDOT's NW division is finally getting in the signal per-lane game. Taken at WIS 25/ N. Broadway St. and Ceder Falls Rd. in Menomonie:

Looking Northbound:




Southbound:



« Last Edit: May 16, 2018, 02:22:57 PM by on_wisconsin »
Logged
"Speed does not kill, suddenly becoming stationary... that's what gets you" - Jeremy Clarkson

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8105
  • U/Wash - Urban Design

  • Age: 22
  • Location: BC / Tacoma, Wash
  • Last Login: Today at 03:02:55 AM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1638 on: May 16, 2018, 05:15:00 PM »

Wisconsin has very good signal placement overall, so it surprises me that a far-right mast mounted signal isn't included. For many states, that's the only extra signal DOTs include.
Logged

MNHighwayMan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2820
  • Blue and gold forever!

  • Age: 26
  • Location: Des Moines
  • Last Login: Today at 07:41:28 AM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1639 on: May 16, 2018, 05:34:55 PM »

The only thing I don't like about that setup is the side-by-side signal heads in the median. I would much rather see the ball indication head mounted on the right mast and leave only the left arrows in the median.
Logged

Michael

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 889
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Auburn, NY
  • Last Login: August 14, 2018, 09:35:29 PM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1640 on: May 16, 2018, 07:16:06 PM »

I also agree with the point that he makes about the right green arrow delay.  It's annoying to have a green ball go to a red ball, then get an arrow.

The green arrow can't come on while the oncoming left turn has a green or yellow orb. This would give the impression to right turning traffic that no other traffic might conflict with them, when, in fact, left turning traffic will be completing their left turn on yellow/red. Basically, on a yellow, all straight/right turning traffic must slow and stop to allow left turning traffic to go.

In this case, there wouldn't be a left turn conflict since the oncoming left turn is protected only, and I can only recall seeing it lead only.  The green ending I'm referring to is straight through for east and west.  The next phase is either left turns from the right and left, or left/through from the right.  Would there still be an issue since there are no left turning cars from the oncoming direction?  The only issue I can think of is if someone jumps the red light before it turns green going straight across from the left.
Logged

traffic light guy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 476
  • Traffic Signal Enthusiast of Pennsylvania

  • Location: Pennsylvania
  • Last Login: Today at 01:32:44 AM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1641 on: May 16, 2018, 09:26:24 PM »

The three orb signals being mounted alongside the turn signals is actually pretty creative.
Logged

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8105
  • U/Wash - Urban Design

  • Age: 22
  • Location: BC / Tacoma, Wash
  • Last Login: Today at 03:02:55 AM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1642 on: May 16, 2018, 09:49:36 PM »

I also agree with the point that he makes about the right green arrow delay.  It's annoying to have a green ball go to a red ball, then get an arrow.

The green arrow can't come on while the oncoming left turn has a green or yellow orb. This would give the impression to right turning traffic that no other traffic might conflict with them, when, in fact, left turning traffic will be completing their left turn on yellow/red. Basically, on a yellow, all straight/right turning traffic must slow and stop to allow left turning traffic to go.

In this case, there wouldn't be a left turn conflict since the oncoming left turn is protected only, and I can only recall seeing it lead only.  The green ending I'm referring to is straight through for east and west.  The next phase is either left turns from the right and left, or left/through from the right.  Would there still be an issue since there are no left turning cars from the oncoming direction?  The only issue I can think of is if someone jumps the red light before it turns green going straight across from the left.

The intersection in the video appeared to have pro/per phasing for all approaches. Several frames showed two overhead 5-section towers, which are used in Illinois when the left and right turns have protected phases (but not fully-protected operation). A green arrow coming on during a permissive phase might confuse drivers into thinking their movement is occuring while protected, when they actually have to stop and yield to those completing their left turn at the end of the cycle (common in Illinois).

If the intersection was fully protected, right turn green arrows could be used much more often, because the right turns would in fact be protected (as long as the pedestrian walk sign was not on, and the oncoming left turn had a red arrow).

There is an intersection near me in Tacoma, WA (Waller @ Pioneer), where the right turn onto Waller has a green right arrow that burns for more than 90% of the time. Because Waller is split-phased at that intersection, and the other approach to Pioneer has virtually no one approaching it ever, the only time the right green arrow ever turns off is when the oncoming left turn has a green arrow. I was initially curious why a yield on green signal was not used, but with the constantly burning green arrow giving the impression to right-turning traffic that their movement is fully protected, you could not use a permissive signal for the oncoming left turn. I'm sure such an operation has been permitted in the past, but to the best of my knowledge, a combination of a green orb and a green arrow for opposite approaches is not allowed.

The three orb signals being mounted alongside the turn signals is actually pretty creative.

I like it as well. Very Australian/Kiwi.
Logged

SignBridge

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1134
  • Location: Long Island, New York
  • Last Login: August 17, 2018, 10:06:30 PM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1643 on: May 16, 2018, 09:50:17 PM »

Pretty good configuration in those Wisconsin photos, but I wonder how often those median post-mounted heads get knocked down....... California had a lot of those years ago but they phased them out in favor of far-left corner heads.
Logged

Michael

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 889
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Auburn, NY
  • Last Login: August 14, 2018, 09:35:29 PM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1644 on: May 16, 2018, 10:11:23 PM »

If the intersection was fully protected, right turn green arrows could be used much more often, because the right turns would in fact be protected (as long as the pedestrian walk sign was not on, and the oncoming left turn had a red arrow).

I was thinking of the intersection I posted a link to when I made my initial statement, and all left turns are protected only, so that explains my confusion!
Logged

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8105
  • U/Wash - Urban Design

  • Age: 22
  • Location: BC / Tacoma, Wash
  • Last Login: Today at 03:02:55 AM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1645 on: May 16, 2018, 10:34:47 PM »

Pretty good configuration in those Wisconsin photos, but I wonder how often those median post-mounted heads get knocked down....... California had a lot of those years ago but they phased them out in favor of far-left corner heads.

I don't think California did a very good job placing its signals. Many jurisdictions around the world, including several here in North America, utilize median mounted signals without issue. What California and Nevada never did very well was placing them back from the intersection. If they are placed too close, they will get struck by wide vehicles turning left. British Columbia generally places protected left turns at least a couple of meters back from the crosswalk line.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2018, 11:44:01 PM by jakeroot »
Logged

roadfro

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3436
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Reno, NV
  • Last Login: August 17, 2018, 10:15:32 PM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1646 on: May 18, 2018, 10:39:21 PM »

Pretty good configuration in those Wisconsin photos, but I wonder how often those median post-mounted heads get knocked down....... California had a lot of those years ago but they phased them out in favor of far-left corner heads.

I don't think California did a very good job placing its signals. Many jurisdictions around the world, including several here in North America, utilize median mounted signals without issue. What California and Nevada never did very well was placing them back from the intersection. If they are placed too close, they will get struck by wide vehicles turning left. British Columbia generally places protected left turns at least a couple of meters back from the crosswalk line.

Nevada was never really big on median signals (or at least, not to my knowledge). But you're right in that some of the ones I can think of were on narrow medians and right near the nose of the median... Current practice for nearly all jurisdictions is to just put left turn signals overhead.

There are three locations in Nevada I can think of with post-mounted signals in the median, two in Las Vegas and one in Sparks. In all cases, the posts are located on medians that are at least a traffic lane wide—although one Vegas location still puts the posts pretty close to the median nose.
Logged
Roadfro - AARoads Pacific Southwest moderator since 2010, Nevada roadgeek since 1983.

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8105
  • U/Wash - Urban Design

  • Age: 22
  • Location: BC / Tacoma, Wash
  • Last Login: Today at 03:02:55 AM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1647 on: May 18, 2018, 11:58:27 PM »

Pretty good configuration in those Wisconsin photos, but I wonder how often those median post-mounted heads get knocked down....... California had a lot of those years ago but they phased them out in favor of far-left corner heads.

I don't think California did a very good job placing its signals. Many jurisdictions around the world, including several here in North America, utilize median mounted signals without issue. What California and Nevada never did very well was placing them back from the intersection. If they are placed too close, they will get struck by wide vehicles turning left. British Columbia generally places protected left turns at least a couple of meters back from the crosswalk line.

Nevada was never really big on median signals (or at least, not to my knowledge). But you're right in that some of the ones I can think of were on narrow medians and right near the nose of the median... Current practice for nearly all jurisdictions is to just put left turn signals overhead.

There are three locations in Nevada I can think of with post-mounted signals in the median, two in Las Vegas and one in Sparks. In all cases, the posts are located on medians that are at least a traffic lane wide—although one Vegas location still puts the posts pretty close to the median nose.

It's perfectly logical why post mounted signals would be placed so close to the stop line. The agency's want to make sure that these signals are visible for traffic at the front of the line, however, traffic at the front of the line can usually see the signals in front of them or on the far left. Nearside signals are typically most helpful for cars that are more than three back.

I may have unfairly singled out Nevada and California. Judging by the photos above from Wisconsin, they also placed their median signals quite close to the median nose. So apparently, they don't have quite as many issues as we all may be thinking. Although I seem to recall new signals in Wisconsin not using median signals as often as before, so maybe there have been some issues.

Looking at other countries, such as the UK, Australia, NZ, and South Africa, median signals are all very common. Certainly the norm. Agencies in the US that want to utilize median signals just have to look at these countries for some guidance. Certainly they wouldn't use them as often if they were constantly being knocked over. The key is just to not put them so close to the edges of the medians.
Logged

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8105
  • U/Wash - Urban Design

  • Age: 22
  • Location: BC / Tacoma, Wash
  • Last Login: Today at 03:02:55 AM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1648 on: May 19, 2018, 07:05:57 PM »

A couple examples of all yellow signal backplates in Silverdale and Redmond, WA (respectively). The first one is definitely not allowed, but I think the second one is OK with them being bike signals...





I think these are OK, but the yellow borders seem really thick...

Logged

SignBridge

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1134
  • Location: Long Island, New York
  • Last Login: August 17, 2018, 10:06:30 PM
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #1649 on: May 19, 2018, 08:41:28 PM »

The MUTCD requires the front of backplates to be dull black. Though I know yellow backplates are common in Canada.
Logged

 


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.