SRL Urban64 Temporary Signals

[traffic-light-man]

I've noticed within the City of Liverpool over the last 12 months or so, the traditional approach of putting old signals in barrels (or as of late, NAL concrete blocks) when undertaking upgrades has been superseded for using the SRL Urban64 Temporary Signals.

The Urban64 involves using non-standard signal heads mounted to temporary structures with all cabling at height etc. I assume they are classed as temporary rather than portable for this purpose, and as such, I'd have thought they'd have to use UK TSRGD compliant signals, but perhaps not.

Anyway, my questions are:

1) Is it really more cost effective to commission a full set of temporary signals, rather than putting the old signals in temporary foundations whilst the upgrade takes place?
2) How common are the Urban64 systems? Driving through Manchester yesterday, despite the many roadworks involving complete junction re-designs, I didn't see any Urban64 systems, just lots of Helios and Elite signals in NAL foundations, whereas in Liverpool, they're installing Urban64's even where it's just a replacement of existing equipment rather than a whole re-design.

[Chris Bertram]

I've noticed within the City of Liverpool over the last 12 months or so, the traditional approach of putting old signals in barrels (or as of late, NAL concrete blocks) when undertaking upgrades has been superseded for using the SRL Urban64 Temporary Signals.

The Urban64 involves using non-standard signal heads mounted to temporary structures with all cabling at height etc. I assume they are classed as temporary rather than portable for this purpose, and as such, I'd have thought they'd have to use UK TSRGD compliant signals, but perhaps not.

Anyway, my questions are:

1) Is it really more cost effective to commission a full set of temporary signals, rather than putting the old signals in temporary foundations whilst the upgrade takes place?
2) How common are the Urban64 systems? Driving through Manchester yesterday, despite the many roadworks involving complete junction re-designs, I didn't see any Urban64 systems, just lots of Helios and Elite signals in NAL foundations, whereas in Liverpool, they're installing Urban64's even where it's just a replacement of existing equipment rather than a whole re-design.

I saw them in Bristol a couple of years ago, and more recently at the Belgrave interchange on the Birmingham Ring Road. There was a substantial modification of the junction going on (it's still ongoing, but is complete enough for permanent signals to be reinstated), and the signal sequence was modified during the works. I think the signals were moved around a little while in place as well. I've no idea about the costs, I'm afraid, but reusing the old signals - which had been there for a while and were looking rather tired - was probably not thought viable.

[traffic-light-man]

It's interesting to note that following the completion of works on Victoria Street in Liverpool City Centre (which prompted this thread), LCC (or Amey, I'm not sure who actually makes these types of decisions these days) appear to have abandoned the use of the Urban64 systems.

They now seem to be deploying regular portable signals in all sorts of configurations, with the massive downside that they seem to get stuck on all-red far too regularly. And I didn't realise it until I witnessed it several times recently, but when they 'fail', they snap to red irrespective of what it showing at the time, which causes some minor ruckus!

I'm aware that portable signals are designed to fail to all-red because historically they've been used to control the movement of traffic through reduce capacity road space so all-red is inherently safer, but at city centre junctions and those on arterial routes where there are no reduced capacities (in a conflicting manner), I do feel that a fail to off set up might make more sense. I assume that is a plus flag flown by the Urban64 signals given they're 'temporary' rather than portable.

Although having wireless UTMC connections, they also don't seem to be able to have the ability to call stages on demand like the permanent signals they're covering and rather cycle through all of the stages in order to get around to servicing a request. This goes for the pedestrian crossings as well.

Similarly to the U64s, however, these all appear to be instances where we've (we being motors and NMUs) been unduly subject to temporary signals since before Christmas. One junction retains it's permanent signals, including the box signs still being illuminated, and the only sight of any work is indeed the appearance of the temporary signals themselves. The next junction along in the scheme has included the removal of the signal heads, but that's the only actual work that appears to have taken place there too.

[WHBM]

These cabled-at-height temporary signals appeared at several junctions in London being renewed a year or two ago, but likewise seem to have disappeared.

TTLs sticking on all red seems to be an ever-prevalent issue, along with missing out one stage. One near us failed like this last year, it was interesting that following reporting this on the borough website I got into email conversation with the borough highways engineer, who (fortunately) came to work along that same road , and really got the contractors by the short-and-curlies; they were manned in daytime thereafter. Talk about a bored looking operator … !

As to nothing going on at site, I refer you to my past posts on how to make money as a streetworks contractor. There's nothing better than excavating, then finding you need a client-supplied component which is out of stock. Even better if the manufacturer doesn't currently have them either. Meanwhile the TTLs carry on clocking up their dayrate.

[Al__S]

are you all overthinking it and the different temporary signals at different jobs are just down to a different TM contractor?

[DB617]

These cabled-at-height temporary signals appeared at several junctions in London being renewed a year or two ago, but likewise seem to have disappeared.

TTLs sticking on all red seems to be an ever-prevalent issue, along with missing out one stage. One near us failed like this last year, it was interesting that following reporting this on the borough website I got into email conversation with the borough highways engineer, who (fortunately) came to work along that same road , and really got the contractors by the short-and-curlies; they were manned in daytime thereafter. Talk about a bored looking operator … !

As to nothing going on at site, I refer you to my past posts on how to make money as a streetworks contractor. There's nothing better than excavating, then finding you need a client-supplied component which is out of stock. Even better if the manufacturer doesn't currently have them either. Meanwhile the TTLs carry on clocking up their dayrate.

Why on earth is stuck on red such a major issue? It's been a problem at least once a week on at least one of the myriad TTL layouts that have been constant all over the Barry area for the past 3 years. There is a temporary light at the crossroads on the B4266 at the moment which has just been reported to be stuck on all red again. It seems whenever the TMCs go home for the weekend (as there is usually one man and van monitoring each set during work hours, as you said, worst/best job ever depending on your mobile data plan) their TTLs fail safe within a day. I have never heard of a computerised/digital system being that reliably unreliable, and that's saying something because I work with smart meters.

[traffic-light-man]

are you all overthinking it and the different temporary signals at different jobs are just down to a different TM contractor?

All the jobs I'm referencing in my area are using SRL products of one kind or another, all with overall TM from Premier TM and Civils carried out by one of three companies that are all a regular sight around these parts. Apart from one set of Nissen signals in a scheme which is currently using about 5 different sets of portable signals (the rest by SRL). All the jobs are also council jobs, as opposed to services.

I'm also of the belief that the signals are provided by SRL rather than the TM contractor, given that it seems to be an on-call SRL engineer that rocks up when there's an issue.

Is one of the issues causing the all-red to occur a low or failure in batteries in one of the units? If this is the case, obviously a big advantage of the U64 is that it's mains powered generally speaking.

Like I mentioned earlier, it's most frustrating that in several instances, there's perfectly good signals switched off and bagged up still with mains power feeding the controller for weeks on end while the portable signals are stuck on red next to them

[darkcape]

I believe the benefit with U64s is you can have far more complicated signal set-ups than with portable signals where you are limited to a few configurations of up to 4-way lights.

The U64s let you use filters, multiple phases & stages especially if many pedestrian movements to cater for. Cabling at height also makes the groundwork easier as cabling is out of the way.

On my scheme last year we considered using U64s but the cost was too high so we put all the existing heads in NAL blocks and continued to run off the existing controller. Downside was the controller was located in the middle of our new carriageway which meant the power supply, BT connection and controller had to be moved and cables extended to the new verge.

[traffic-light-man]

I believe the benefit with U64s is you can have far more complicated signal set-ups than with portable signals where you are limited to a few configurations of up to 4-way lights.

The U64s let you use filters, multiple phases & stages especially if many pedestrian movements to cater for. Cabling at height also makes the groundwork easier as cabling is out of the way.

That's a very fair point, and at recent works on the A561 where they were deployed would have no doubt been the better option over that of portables. However this was one of the situations where we had both old and new poles next to each other simultaneously with what appeared to be limited groundwork (other than resurfacing) taking place which prompted my original question of cost effectiveness over a bit of work pulling cables from draw pits and extending etc.


Interestingly, there's been a development at my local portable signals that I've been rambling on about, more specifically the ones which are sited next to permanent signals with controller power. The portables have all been clumped together against a wall, still stuck in what appears to be all-red, while the council have un-bagged and switched the permanent signals back on! This looks like it happened at some point yesterday.

[WHBM]

Is one of the issues causing the all-red to occur a low or failure in batteries in one of the units?

One wonders how there is power to drive the red aspects but not for them to sequence.

[traffic-light-man]

Is one of the issues causing the all-red to occur a low or failure in batteries in one of the units?

One wonders how there is power to drive the red aspects but not for them to sequence.

I was thinking of it as a fail-safe(ish) in a shuttle working scenario. If one unit loses power, does the other one hold the red, as this would be 'safer' than having them all-out?

Therefore, applying that same failure system to a junction set up where there are 2 or 3 heads per approach, and 8+ pedestrian heads, it looks a bit daft when they fail to all-red because one head has ran out of juice.

Bizarrely, when they fail to all-red, it seems the pedestrian demand indicator illuminates as well, just to ensure the pedestrians that their demand has been entered

[AndyB]

It sounds as though it's a case of "Uh-oh, no information from signal X. I don't know what it's showing, so I don't know if turning another light green would result in traffic meeting each other when they shouldn't so I'll set the signals that I know about to red until signal X gets back in touch."

[traffic-light-man]

It sounds as though it's a case of "Uh-oh, no information from signal X. I don't know what it's showing, so I don't know if turning another light green would result in traffic meeting each other when they shouldn't so I'll set the signals that I know about to red until signal X gets back in touch."

Indeed a possibility. I hadn't really considered the fact that radio-controlled units will be prone to losing communication.

Another fairly local set of portable signals on the A59 in Maghull recently had what appeared to be lagging issues. I.e., on my approach, the 'secondary' head was a good two seconds ahead of the 'primary' head, most noticeable during the closing and starting ambers. All sorts of variables possible, but perhaps this was a result of a lag in communication (rather than a complete drop-out).

[Gareth]

I always assumed Urban64s ran off the legacy controller once the old signals were disconnected. Is this not the case?

Certainly, I tend to find that they tend to duplicate the old signals in terms of placement and phasing.

One advantage about Urban64s is that you don't need to keep the old system running, which means the installation of the new system doesn't need to work around it and the making good of the paving can be done before they're even switched on.

[mercer]

A set of Urban64's were used in Leicester last year whilst the junction outside the railway station was upgraded. GSV has now picked them up:

https://goo.gl/maps/G8Tukwd7WT7BqcEB7

[traffic-light-man]

I always assumed Urban64s ran off the legacy controller once the old signals were disconnected. Is this not the case?

Certainly, I tend to find that they tend to duplicate the old signals in terms of placement and phasing.

One advantage about Urban64s is that you don't need to keep the old system running, which means the installation of the new system doesn't need to work around it and the making good of the paving can be done before they're even switched on.

They use purpose built temporary controllers, on a similar chassis to portable power distribution units. Using mercer's example from Leicester, you can see it here with the access at the base for forklifts, telehandlers and eyes on the top for lifting operations.

Indeed, they're absolutely ideal for situations where there are substantial civils work taking place because of all the benefits discussed. However, on straight like-for-like upgrades with very little carriageway alterations, they seem like a bit of a cash-cow (for SRL anyway, and fair play to them!), where NAL foundation blocks and the old kit would appear to be a more cost effective alternative.

[ratcliffe]

It also depends on the job. That one at Blackbird Road in Leicester had it’s own controller and it’s own comms to link back into the UTC system in Area Traffic Control, but another job in Leicester at the same time on London Road, outside the railway station used its own controller, but hooked into the original controller to use the router etc for the comms.
However, the common thing in Leicester’s use of Urban64 signals is that they’ve always had their own controller.

[darkcape]

Leicester strikes again with Urbo64s as they're spending 5 whole nights ( ) installing the system on the B4114/A563 Everards squareabout as part of the Fosse Park Extension access works this week.

The island only has 4 arms but is 5-6 lanes wide on all approaches & exits with right-turn filters on the "circulatory" carriageway, lots of mast-arms or portal gantries with multiple heads over lanes, plus ped Crossing facilities. I shudder to think at the price but when the Crown is paying...

I'll get some photos when the installation is complete but it'll be the biggest I've ever seen.

[L.J.D]

Wakefield uses them alot at refurb sites. I think they are perfectly justified at complex junctions with multiple separate turn phases it beats the old traditional temps where traffic backs up badly because all needs aren't catered for. I've noticed traffic runs alot more smoothly through junction upgrades plus I've also seen they can use totem pole arrangements on them too which again would make using them a benefit.

[traffic-light-man]

Liverpool still seems quiet on the U64 front again, all the schemes over the last few months are using standard SRL portables with UTC connections.

Leicester strikes again with Urbo64s as they're spending 5 whole nights ( ) installing the system on the B4114/A563 Everards squareabout as part of the Fosse Park Extension access works this week.
<snip>
lots of mast-arms or portal gantries with multiple heads over lanes, plus ped Crossing facilities. I shudder to think at the price but when the Crown is paying...

That area seems to have mast-arms and gantry signals almost as a matter of standard!

I've also seen they can use totem pole arrangements on them too which again would make using them a benefit.

You've answered my question that had arisen in response to Darkscape's post, which was going to be if anyone had seen the use of mast-arms or high-level duplicate signals on U64 systems.

We had a U64 site in Liverpool which was in place for probably around six months (I'm not sure why the work took so long, given there were not actual changes made to the layout, but that's another conversation) at a busy urban junction with 30mph & 40mph roads. The existing signals included four mast-arms, and the replacement signals now include four mast-arms and four high-level 'totem' signals.

The U64 had no high-level signals installed for the duration of its presence, which made me think about the justifications for the additional high-level signals (or indeed, the justification for the lack of them in the U64 system) given there were none present for such a prolonged length of time.