[TCUG] Re: FW: TCUG query-temporary controller
- From: mervyn.hallworth@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- To: tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:22:25 +0100
Jag,
I think I see where you are coming from now. But given that often only a
minority of controllers on site are the 'latest' type, swapping PROMS
around may not be all that practicable. In which case the option of
building just one type of 'temporary' controller (possibly on a frame as
Grahame suggests) might be the more universal solution (albeit with more
config hassle).
Such temporary controllers would be ideal for 'planned' roadworks, since
they provide UTC capability.
Mervyn
"Morar Jag \(ST\)" <Jag.Morar@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: tcug-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
31/07/2007 15:02
Please respond to
tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To
<tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject
[TCUG] Re: FW: TCUG query-temporary controller
Mervyn,
When I was first approached with this issue, my sentiments were very
much along you thoughts.
However, there are portability issues such as: connection interfaces to
existing site cabling, ELV supply and cabling interfaces if the signal
heads are to located in drums, Electricity supply generator, instation
communication interface for both UTC and RM and ability to carryout
rapid deployment.
My thought is that we develop this for each manufacturer's generic
controller, based on the latest version thereby being also able to use
the existing controller configuration to effect rapid deployment.
Therefore, if there is a PEEK controller knockdown then we can deploy
the PEEK temporary controller, and we do the same with Siemens and
Microsense.=20
Essentially, the temporary controller would need to comply with the HA
requirement TR2500 (2210) and other applicable regulations.
Jag Morar
Transport for London/DTO
16 Kings Buildings
London
SW1P 3HQ
0207126 2754
Please note my new email address: jag.morar@xxxxxxxxxx
-----Original Message-----
From: tcug-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tcug-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of mervyn.hallworth@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 31 July 2007 10:25
To: tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [TCUG] Re: FW: TCUG query
I may be missing something here, but surely you just need a new=20
('permanent-type') controller equipped with elv outputs (Microsense and=20
Peek both do this as I understand it), which will come with all=20
functionality including UTC interface (as specified). If you install
this=20
on a short term basis - surely it becomes 'temporary'!
Mervyn
Leeds 0113 2476750
"Pat Gregory" <patrick.gregory2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>=20
Sent by: tcug-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
31/07/2007 09:28
Please respond to
tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To
<tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject
[TCUG] Re: FW: TCUG query
This subject has been bouncing around for years!!
I would imagine that the first requirement is to look at the legal
requirements for temporary signals (conflicts, detection etc.) and then
apply them to the semi permanent arrangement, hopefully any permanent
controller post 0141 would supercede these requirements! I would imagine
it
would be pretty easy to get a "bombproof" controller (T200, 400) which
is easy to build up or down to the required configuration. (other
controllers are available) If there is a requirement for 50-0-50 supply,
then I=20
believe
most controllers were available to Welsh Office Spec or possibly Hong
Kong which had this as a requirement. I've never understood why temps
could not be controlled under UTC as long as the controller and
interface were approved for use, which in this case, they would be. I
would look no=20
further
than TfLs stockpile of controllers and build various configurations to=20
suit,
based on the existing MOC.
regards
-----Original Message-----
From: tcug-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tcug-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On=20
Behalf
Of Morar Jag (ST)
Sent: 30 July 2007 13:26
To: tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [TCUG] FW: TCUG query
Alan.
Thank you for your response.
As I understand it, portables have limited capability and features. What
we
are attempting to do is develop a temporary/portable controller that can
provide the full range of phases/stages and detection as the existing
site controller that may have been knocked down or is being replaced
under modernisation.
The key issue is that we want to maintain the network capacity through
the period that the work is taking place.
Best regards,
Jag
-----Original Message-----
From: Allan Lonsdale [mailto:allan.lonsdale@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]=3D20
Sent: 30 July 2007 11:32
To: Morar Jag (ST)
Subject: TCUG query
Jag - in Blackpool we use portable signals for such situations - these
are provided and managed by a local traffic management company.
In the event of a knock-down we can usually have portable signal control
within 1 hour - if its a large junction then we reduce the traffic lanes
with signing and coning - obviously this causes delays but at least the
junction is safely controlled.
We also successfully used portables at various stages of junction
modernisation / improvements.
With the advent of the new radio controlled portables there is no longer
the
need for extensive cabling and cable mats
Regards
Allan Lonsdale
Engineer - Traffic Signals
Blackpool Council=3D20
Email Disclaimer is:=3D20 http://www.blackpool.gov.uk/EmailDisclaimer/
This message has been scanned by F-Secure Anti-Virus for Microsoft=20
Exchange
as part of the Council's e-mail and internet policy.
************************************************************************
***=3D
********
The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential
and=20
i=3D
ntended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are=20
add=3D
ressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any
liability=20
=3D
as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any=20
attache=3D
d transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised
that=20
=3D
you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination,=20
forw=3D
arding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this email in error please notify=20
postmaster@xxxxxxxxx=3D
k.
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for
the=20
=3D
presence of computer viruses.
************************************************************************
***=3D
********
-----------------------------------------------------------
A message from the TCUG mailing list. For information about the list
visit //www.freelists.org/webpage/tcug
-----------------------------------------------------------
A message from the TCUG mailing list. For information about
the list visit //www.freelists.org/webpage/tcug
________________________________________________________________________
The information in this email (and any attachment) may be for the
intended recipient only. If you know you are not the intended recipient,
please do not use or disclose the information in any way and please
delete this email (and any attachment) from your system.=20
The Council does not accept service of legal documents by e-mail.
________________________________________________________________________
-----------------------------------------------------------
A message from the TCUG mailing list. For information about
the list visit //www.freelists.org/webpage/tcug
-----------------------------------------------------------
A message from the TCUG mailing list. For information about
the list visit //www.freelists.org/webpage/tcug
-----------------------------------------------------------
A message from the TCUG mailing list. For information about
the list visit //www.freelists.org/webpage/tcug
Other related posts:
