5 ms·

> Why not detect my coming This bugs me. $50 of hardware can accomplish this, today. Raspi running vehicle detection code. If something is coming and the other

> Why not detect my coming This bugs me. $50 of hardware can accomplish this, today. Raspi running vehicle detection code. If something is coming and the other way is clear, why not flip the intersection before it arrives?

lm28469 7y ago
> $50 of hardware can accomplish this, today. Raspi running vehicle detection code. $50 * 300 000 (quick google search about the number of traffic light in the US), That's not taking into account installation and regular maintenance.
- clairity 7y ago
  $1.5M (maybe 3X that with other costs) is literally a rounding error for the US federal budget: expenditures are $4.4T and revenue is $3.4T (that $1T/yr deficit is maddening btw).
  - mcguire 7y ago
    How long would it take you to install a traffic light camera system? Would you do that for $100?
    - imglorp 7y ago
      It's probably easier to install than the typical sensor loop under the asphalt. The camera and cpu could be on the same circuit board as one of the LED lens units, which are already sealed units heated against snow. It would need an additional comm line down to the controller from each light head, which might just be a cable pull through conduit.
      - lm28469 7y ago
        Besides being weather proof it would also need to be theft proof. It would also probably have to pass some sort of certification(s) as it would control traffic lights which could be dangerous in case of malfunctions, regular tests, &c. I'm all for optimising things but sometimes it's just not worth the hassle. A well timed orange light is good enough.
- CaliforniaKarl 7y ago
  In addition, even if it is inside an enclosure, it has to be able to withstand the elements (including extremes of temperature and humidity), and be able to have virtually 100% availability outside of power-loss situations.
tsimionescu 7y ago
> $50 of hardware can accomplish this, today. Raspi running vehicle detection code. That's only true if you want hardware that sometimes detects some kind of vehicles, in the right weather and from the right angles. Truly reliably detecting this is much further away. The consequences of not getting it right are not as catastrophic as getting it wrong in a self-driving car, but they could still mess traffic up pretty badly.
skeletonjelly 7y ago
The hardware is the tip of the priceberg my friend
adrianmonk 7y ago
I've thought about this and my own take on it is this is actually an opportunity that has not yet been exploited. The cost of the hardware is $50 now, but that has only recently become the case. Your reaction might be that it has been $50 for like 5 or 10 years now, and if so my response is that in this area, that is recent. It's a pretty slow-moving, late adopter industry. Most of the equipment getting installed probably hasn't been redesigned in years or decades. The people approving stuff want to buy from known vendors. The vendors are making money steadily now and don't want to go out on a limb with unproven tech. Which doesn't mean it's impossible. I interpret it the opposite way: the fact that it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it won't or can't. I would expect it to take this long or longer. Also, I think the angle for getting this adopted isn't really efficiency, it's cost saving. Right now, some lights are on sensors (instead of just timing) but they do it with induction loops (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_loop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_loop). If you could match or surpass the reliability of those at a lower cost, you might get people to switch. But once you've crossed that hurdle, you can improve efficiency too, of course. Of course, you have to keep in mind that the camera has to be mounted in the proper position. So it's probably not really $50 of hardware unless you can (in most cases, at least) piggyback on something that already exists. Although that seems possible because the signal light does need to be visible by cars approaching the intersection.
qtplatypus 7y ago
The cost isn't the hardware. The cost would be doing all testing to prove and certify that this is safe in all situations.

lm28469 7y ago

> $50 of hardware can accomplish this, today. Raspi running vehicle detection code. $50 * 300 000 (quick google search about the number of traffic light in the US), That's not taking into account installation and regular maintenance.

clairity 7y ago
$1.5M (maybe 3X that with other costs) is literally a rounding error for the US federal budget: expenditures are $4.4T and revenue is $3.4T (that $1T/yr deficit is maddening btw).
- mcguire 7y ago
  How long would it take you to install a traffic light camera system? Would you do that for $100?
  - imglorp 7y ago
    It's probably easier to install than the typical sensor loop under the asphalt. The camera and cpu could be on the same circuit board as one of the LED lens units, which are already sealed units heated against snow. It would need an additional comm line down to the controller from each light head, which might just be a cable pull through conduit.
    - lm28469 7y ago
      Besides being weather proof it would also need to be theft proof. It would also probably have to pass some sort of certification(s) as it would control traffic lights which could be dangerous in case of malfunctions, regular tests, &c. I'm all for optimising things but sometimes it's just not worth the hassle. A well timed orange light is good enough.
CaliforniaKarl 7y ago
In addition, even if it is inside an enclosure, it has to be able to withstand the elements (including extremes of temperature and humidity), and be able to have virtually 100% availability outside of power-loss situations.

tsimionescu 7y ago

> $50 of hardware can accomplish this, today. Raspi running vehicle detection code. That's only true if you want hardware that sometimes detects some kind of vehicles, in the right weather and from the right angles. Truly reliably detecting this is much further away. The consequences of not getting it right are not as catastrophic as getting it wrong in a self-driving car, but they could still mess traffic up pretty badly.

skeletonjelly 7y ago

The hardware is the tip of the priceberg my friend

adrianmonk 7y ago

I've thought about this and my own take on it is this is actually an opportunity that has not yet been exploited. The cost of the hardware is $50 now, but that has only recently become the case. Your reaction might be that it has been $50 for like 5 or 10 years now, and if so my response is that in this area, that is recent. It's a pretty slow-moving, late adopter industry. Most of the equipment getting installed probably hasn't been redesigned in years or decades. The people approving stuff want to buy from known vendors. The vendors are making money steadily now and don't want to go out on a limb with unproven tech. Which doesn't mean it's impossible. I interpret it the opposite way: the fact that it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it won't or can't. I would expect it to take this long or longer. Also, I think the angle for getting this adopted isn't really efficiency, it's cost saving. Right now, some lights are on sensors (instead of just timing) but they do it with induction loops (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_loop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_loop). If you could match or surpass the reliability of those at a lower cost, you might get people to switch. But once you've crossed that hurdle, you can improve efficiency too, of course. Of course, you have to keep in mind that the camera has to be mounted in the proper position. So it's probably not really $50 of hardware unless you can (in most cases, at least) piggyback on something that already exists. Although that seems possible because the signal light does need to be visible by cars approaching the intersection.

qtplatypus 7y ago

The cost isn't the hardware. The cost would be doing all testing to prove and certify that this is safe in all situations.