I just posted the submission to have "connected vehicle technology" that talks to the traffic signals to turn them green when a car shows up. This is pretty basic technology that is certainly in place in certain places, but broadly speaking there are many frustrated drivers that could count off tons of stop lights where this technology should be implemented. It can save people a lot of time. It saves emissions too to keep those cars moving to their destinations.
Talking to traffic signals via wireless communication could also be scaled up to count vehicles and algorithms could be used to compare the amount of traffic in each direction and change the lights green based on unnecessarily holding back too many people. Depending on how far the car is able to communicate it may be necessary to station additional "reading beacons" down the road from the signals at congested traffic areas.
This could be especially useful also for relaying info in case of emergencies. A police car or ambulance stuck down the road in traffic could relay via cars or reading beacons up to the stop light to immediately change the signal.
Thanks for creating this website!
last edited almost 2 years ago
It seems they don't let everyone make a submission. So I posted this in the discussion forum.
I have been thinking about this for a couple of years now, but my angle is to avoid traffic congestion on a freeway offramp during shift change at a major employer. The highway department lets the employer give out these transmitters that are programmed to talk to the specific lights between the work place and the historicly congested freeway offramp to employees whose shift begins during a rush hour when traffic is predictibly congested for everyone in that area. Then, if a light gets a signal from say three vehicles during the cycle it allows more green time in that direction for the next two cycles of red light. The transmitters could be put on the sunvisor like a garage door opener.
Another application of this would be to pirate a signal from a donor vehicle in tourist towns like Branson, Missouri; Hot Springs, Arkansas; or Gatlinburg, Tenn. during tourist season peak so that a "control-pilot test vehicle" could automatically indicate to the traffic lighting system of "through traffic bottlenecking", and coordinate the traffic flow accordingly. Note there will always be pedestrians pushing the crosswalk buttons but for the environment, we don't want 50 motorhomes and a hundred vehicles idling with their Air Conditioners about to trip out on high head pressure and radiators boiling over all over the streets while someone wants to cross and leaves all the other intersections blocked in all directions because someone didn't have time to get on through.
Good thoughts EV, you should know that the variety of capabilities you suggest have been utilized within the intersection infrastructure for over 30 years. Traffic Actuated signal systems that respond dynamically to demand have been deployed since the late 1960s (I estimate that more than 80% of intersections are traffic actuated), continuous counting of vehicles is utilized by central systems and distributed systems to adjust traffic flow is the norm in most urban and many rural areas. Emergency vehicle preemption that gives priority vehicles green on demand is deployed in more than 50% of the intersections in the US. There is quite a science to the control of intersection systems both individual and networked. You might imagine that it is a very complex problem the solutions of which are designed to provide safety, congestion mitigation, reduced travel times, and reduction of environmental impact. Behind those cabinet doors that are on the street lie very sophisticated computers and support electronics to provide the control needed to managed this very difficult problem.
Bill1822, thats the funny thing. You think because some places did something a long time ago that the problem is solved?
This is a matter of common sense, not of course technology capability. Yes, the technology is easy to do. The point is that the obvious gets overlooked way too often.
Countless people could tell you all sorts of places where lights have NOT implemented what you consider to be 1960's technology.
Just yesterday I was at a big intersection in a double turn lane filled with cars; plus traffic on the cross street backed up; and yet the light stayed green for through traffic with no cars for 30 seconds. At least 20-30 cars just sitting there for nothing. It was a new intersection too. I bet it HAS all the "behind those cabinet doors" technology. It's not good enough! And "connected vehicles" can help improve it. A LOT.
Dan, you have misread my statement. I merely pointed out that there have been strategies deployed since the 1960's. I wrongly assumed that one would understand that technology evolves and in the case of intersection control there has been a steady evolution of control strategies that have kept pace with the advances in control electronics. I would agree with you and the countless people you refer to that not every intersection has the most sophisticated control schemes. Like everything else all of this comes with a cost, but we are gaining on it. Regarding your yesterday intersection experience, it is likely that an intersection with dual left turn lanes is up to date with respect to control strategies, though not absolute. There are any number of reasons that you had to wait including area wide control that optimizes by network, arterial control that platoons traffic, minimum green intervals that allocate cycle time based on historical average counts that will favor high demand movements, or possibly faulty detection. If the latter, the local agency will likely find out about the faults, should they exist, and correct them.
Regarding connected vehicles, this is a technology that is being researched, tested, proven and will be in general deployment in the future. The technologies are being designed to help reduce collisions thereby creating safer vehicle travel and will also be deployed to help optimize traffic flow.
With a check for about $12 billion plus the auto industry actually agreeing on standards along with their billions of spend, we could likely roll out these technologies sooner than later.
Bill1822, yes, the intersection yesterday was new and surely has your "behind the cabinet door" technology, probably the latest and greatest too. Its in Newark, Delaware (S.College Ave DE 898 intersection with Rt 4 (DE 896) just north of I-95.
The point is don't be so stubborn. If its obvious enough for a) me to point out and b) for you to acknowledge technology is not good enough than please don't submit comments acting like all the answers have been solved since the 1960's.
If you want to take the conversation to another level, I would submit that this all "connected vehicle" concept is a way for the government to get into people's cars and control their decisions. That's another worry. Seeing that folks like you are overlooking the basic solutions such as sensing traffic and adapting to it (with this type of newer, better connected vehicle technology) makes me worry more that this type of program is really going to end up a back-handed way to implement environment-based restrictions on driving.
Anyway, re: your point you want engineers and folks to RESPOND to data collection and change algorithms better for next month. I am saying, "connected vehicles" theres the real-time solution. Maybe you don't want that. Maybe you represent the folks that work on the cabinet boxes. The algorithm doesn't need to be changed for next time when real-time connected vehicle sensors can count and decide right then and there.
Is there any point to trying to help here if the mentality is don't worry we have it all under control?
Comments are closed.