Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Can a high power (1W) laser permanently damage a traffic camera sensor?
1,345 views
Skip to first unread message
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
Aug 15, 2014, 4:34:08 AM8/15/14
to
Just curious as to whether someone shining a 1W laser (IR to Blue wavelength) into the lens of something like a speed camera would cause permanent damage to it.
benj
Aug 15, 2014, 5:29:18 AM8/15/14
to
other factors. the camera lens does focus the beam on the sensor which
creates more energy density that can produce damage (same effect that
creates laser damage in your eyes) but unlike your organic eyes the
camera sensors are doubtless silicon which at minimum you'd have to melt
or at least some of the metal overlay (aluminum or gold) to damage the
sensor. Note that these metals reflect light which protects them from
heating. So the usual method would be to use a much larger pulsed laser
with lots of joules of energy in pulses that can actually melt the
silicon. And even then it depends upon the structure of the electronics
of the sensor whether it just takes out a tiny dot in the image or a
horizontal or vertical stripe or both, or actually trashes the whole
sensor. A 1 watt laser can pop balloons but they are organic.
You could probably do a better job with a loop of chain and pickup
truck... even better elect a new mayor...
amdx
Aug 15, 2014, 7:42:42 AM8/15/14
to
On 8/15/2014 3:34 AM, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
> Just curious as to whether someone shining a 1W laser (IR to Blue wavelength) into the lens of something like a speed camera would cause permanent damage to it.
>
All the stories I've seen about how these are misused as revenue
> Just curious as to whether someone shining a 1W laser (IR to Blue wavelength) into the lens of something like a speed camera would cause permanent damage to it.
>
generators, I'm all for any method that stops it, short of murdering
those responsible for the install and traffic light timing. but jail
time is fine.
Mikek
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Tim Wescott
Aug 15, 2014, 11:28:34 AM8/15/14
to
Probably, if you shined it long enough -- just the heat concentrated in
one spot on the focal plane array should do it.
--
Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com
Tim Wescott
Aug 15, 2014, 11:29:49 AM8/15/14
to
divergence, so I think this one is more right than mine, unless you're
standing on a stepladder and shining the thing into the camera point-blank.
Stefan Heimers
Aug 15, 2014, 11:48:12 AM8/15/14
to
benj wrote:
> You could probably do a better job with a loop of chain and pickup
> truck... even better elect a new mayor...
If there's a tramway you don't even need a pickup truck :-)
> You could probably do a better job with a loop of chain and pickup
> truck... even better elect a new mayor...
http://www.20min.ch/news/kreuz_und_quer/story/30406697
But seriously, the best solution is just to drive at the correct speed, then
you don't need to worry about speed cameras.
Wond
Aug 15, 2014, 12:31:45 PM8/15/14
to
Jim Thompson
Aug 15, 2014, 12:42:26 PM8/15/14
to
I caused the City of Phoenix some grief by timing yellow cycles of
non-camera intersections versus those with red-light cameras, then
posted the data to the editorial pages of every newspaper in town.
(Non-camera intersections averaged 1.5 seconds longer than those with
cameras.)
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
Tim Wescott
Aug 15, 2014, 12:57:40 PM8/15/14
to
On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 09:42:26 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 06:42:42 -0500, amdx <noj...@knology.net> wrote:
>
>>On 8/15/2014 3:34 AM, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
>>> Just curious as to whether someone shining a 1W laser (IR to Blue
>>> wavelength) into the lens of something like a speed camera would cause
>>> permanent damage to it.
>>>
>>>
>> All the stories I've seen about how these are misused as revenue
>>generators, I'm all for any method that stops it, short of murdering
>>those responsible for the install and traffic light timing. but jail
>>time is fine.
>> Mikek
>>
>>---
>>This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
>>protection is active.
>>http://www.avast.com
>
> A drone loaded with a little thermite >:-}
>
> I caused the City of Phoenix some grief by timing yellow cycles of
> non-camera intersections versus those with red-light cameras, then
> posted the data to the editorial pages of every newspaper in town.
>
> (Non-camera intersections averaged 1.5 seconds longer than those with
> cameras.)
Vigilant citizens, like your example, is more effective in the long term.
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 06:42:42 -0500, amdx <noj...@knology.net> wrote:
>
>>On 8/15/2014 3:34 AM, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
>>> Just curious as to whether someone shining a 1W laser (IR to Blue
>>> wavelength) into the lens of something like a speed camera would cause
>>> permanent damage to it.
>>>
>>>
>> All the stories I've seen about how these are misused as revenue
>>generators, I'm all for any method that stops it, short of murdering
>>those responsible for the install and traffic light timing. but jail
>>time is fine.
>> Mikek
>>
>>---
>>This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
>>protection is active.
>>http://www.avast.com
>
> A drone loaded with a little thermite >:-}
>
> I caused the City of Phoenix some grief by timing yellow cycles of
> non-camera intersections versus those with red-light cameras, then
> posted the data to the editorial pages of every newspaper in town.
>
> (Non-camera intersections averaged 1.5 seconds longer than those with
> cameras.)
Any sort of law enforcement method that generates revenue for the agency
doing the enforcing is problematical, in my opinion.
Jim Thompson
Aug 15, 2014, 1:06:41 PM8/15/14
to
to fund safe driving schools.
One intersection I timed had a yellow cycle shorter than the safe
stopping distance when your speed was exactly the posted limit...
guaranteeing much revenue. Noticing the lawyers drooling, the city
changed that one immediately ;-)
amdx
Aug 15, 2014, 1:23:20 PM8/15/14
to
On 8/15/2014 11:42 AM, Jim Thompson wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 06:42:42 -0500, amdx <noj...@knology.net> wrote:
>
>> On 8/15/2014 3:34 AM, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
>>> Just curious as to whether someone shining a 1W laser (IR to Blue wavelength) into the lens of something like a speed camera would cause permanent damage to it.
>>>
>>
>> All the stories I've seen about how these are misused as revenue
>> generators, I'm all for any method that stops it, short of murdering
>> those responsible for the install and traffic light timing. but jail
>> time is fine.
>> Mikek
>>
>> ---
>> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
>> http://www.avast.com
>
> A drone loaded with a little thermite >:-}
>
> I caused the City of Phoenix some grief by timing yellow cycles of
> non-camera intersections versus those with red-light cameras, then
> posted the data to the editorial pages of every newspaper in town.
>
> (Non-camera intersections averaged 1.5 seconds longer than those with
> cameras.)
>
> ...Jim Thompson
>
Yep, I have read this about other cities also. I think it is criminal.
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 06:42:42 -0500, amdx <noj...@knology.net> wrote:
>
>> On 8/15/2014 3:34 AM, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
>>> Just curious as to whether someone shining a 1W laser (IR to Blue wavelength) into the lens of something like a speed camera would cause permanent damage to it.
>>>
>>
>> All the stories I've seen about how these are misused as revenue
>> generators, I'm all for any method that stops it, short of murdering
>> those responsible for the install and traffic light timing. but jail
>> time is fine.
>> Mikek
>>
>> ---
>> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
>> http://www.avast.com
>
> A drone loaded with a little thermite >:-}
>
> I caused the City of Phoenix some grief by timing yellow cycles of
> non-camera intersections versus those with red-light cameras, then
> posted the data to the editorial pages of every newspaper in town.
>
> (Non-camera intersections averaged 1.5 seconds longer than those with
> cameras.)
>
> ...Jim Thompson
>
Put them in jail, and hope they have a new unwanted sex life,
for years! Just pisses my off, and I've never had a camera ticket.
I think I even saw where the fines are split with the company that
sets up the system.
Tim Wescott
Aug 15, 2014, 1:41:52 PM8/15/14
to
attention to drug laws over the years. When the whole fashion of
confiscating money "generated by drug profits" came along, there were a
tremendous number of abuses.
Even when the moneys generated just went to the D.A.R.E program, you still
had case after case of egregious prosecution. Basically, it got to the
point where if you traveled anywhere with a sufficiently large bundle of
cash, you were leaving yourself open not only to losing your freedom, but
to having everything you owned confiscated.
Jim Thompson
Aug 15, 2014, 1:47:12 PM8/15/14
to
This is heartening...
<http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-red-light-camera-indictments-20140813-story.html>
benj
Aug 15, 2014, 3:08:02 PM8/15/14
to
Rule: If there is a something valuable somewhere, it really ought to be
stolen.
benj
Aug 15, 2014, 3:17:08 PM8/15/14
to
offers to install the cameras at no cost to improve "traffic safety".
Then once in operation the company gets paid for the system out of the
fines. So essentially the city gets to set up motorist bilking
operations for free and no risk. While jerks blasting through red lights
is a problem, the interesting thing is that studies show that
intersections with cameras end up having MORE accidents than they did
without the cameras as people brake to avoid tickets.
Of course there was a problem here that since the camera did not
identify who was driving the vehicle the charges did not stand up in
court. But with a little under the table money and the law was fixed so
that now the car owner is responsible no matter who is driving the car.
Sweet.
benj
Aug 15, 2014, 3:23:34 PM8/15/14
to
k...@attt.bizz
Aug 15, 2014, 3:51:48 PM8/15/14
to
different kettle. The problem with both isn't that they exist, rather
that they're manipulated by the politicians as a source of revenue,
rather than public safety. As are result, the public's perception of
the law and authority in general, goes down the toilet. The 55MPH
speed limit was the first step down that slope and I'm sure cameras
aren't the end.
k...@attt.bizz
Aug 15, 2014, 3:56:24 PM8/15/14
to
On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 10:06:41 -0700, Jim Thompson
brother or campaign manager.
>One intersection I timed had a yellow cycle shorter than the safe
>stopping distance when your speed was exactly the posted limit...
>guaranteeing much revenue. Noticing the lawyers drooling, the city
>changed that one immediately ;-)
jurb...@gmail.com
Aug 15, 2014, 6:29:34 PM8/15/14
to
>" caused the City of Phoenix some grief by timing yellow cycles of
non-camera intersections versus those with red-light cameras, then
posted the data to the editorial pages of every newspaper in town. "
Cool !
non-camera intersections versus those with red-light cameras, then
posted the data to the editorial pages of every newspaper in town. "
Neon John
Aug 15, 2014, 6:58:42 PM8/15/14
to
On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 01:34:08 -0700 (PDT), Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
<dirk....@gmail.com> wrote:
>Just curious as to whether someone shining a 1W laser (IR to Blue wavelength) into the lens of something like a speed camera would cause permanent damage to it.
Don't know about speed cameras. If they have mechanical shutters like
<dirk....@gmail.com> wrote:
>Just curious as to whether someone shining a 1W laser (IR to Blue wavelength) into the lens of something like a speed camera would cause permanent damage to it.
my digicam does to protect the sensor from sunlight when not in use,
then probably not.
But a 1 watt laser certainly will damage a surveillance camera. CCD
or vidicon. I have first-hand knowledge :-)
John
John DeArmond
http://www.neon-john.com
http://www.fluxeon.com
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
See website for email address
Tim Wescott
Aug 15, 2014, 7:16:16 PM8/15/14
to
speed limit came along.
Do get your history straight.
k...@attt.bizz
Aug 15, 2014, 7:29:07 PM8/15/14
to
>Do get your history straight.
benj
Aug 16, 2014, 12:15:43 AM8/16/14
to
tickets. Now it's all automated. Money collected untouched by human hands!
But of course, I'd point out since this is sci.electronics.design, that
it's not automated enough. Given the current level of technology in
cars, it would be a small thing to enable the car computer linked with
GPS and roadside gummint gear to monitor all drivers 24/7. It would be
simple. The computer will know if you have exceeded the speed limit or
failed to buckle your seat belt. Furthermore, the government link also
provides traffic light timing information to determine if you have gone
through a changing light or failed to come to complete non tire rotating
stop at every stop sign. This will be linked to local police that
records the violation automatically and just as automatically debits
your bank account for the fine which of course has been properly
adjusted for conditions (like say doubled in a work zone).
You guys understand this technology and you know this is all easy to do.
Give the gear to the cities free and get paid out of the money..er
collected from motorists. Get to work and you'll soon be billionaires.
Just as a hint: There used to be a small town west of me here 60 people,
yes, just 60. It was on a main highway and they had a traditional
traffic trap there. It used to rake in several MILLION dollars a year!
Had a cop car that looked like the BatMobile! Now here's the funny part.
The town auditor gets arrested for embezzling a million bucks. Admits to
having a gambling problem where (he says) he lost all the money. Gets a
slap on the wrist with a short time in stir. A few years later, the NEW
town auditor gets arrested for embezzling a million bucks. Same Gambling
story, same slap on the wrist. (and probably same trip to some resort
town in Mexico). Eventually the town (then down to 35 people) voted to
unincorporate. Ain't politics grand!
daku...@gmail.com
Aug 16, 2014, 1:31:38 AM8/16/14
to
On Friday, August 15, 2014 4:34:08 AM UTC-4, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
> Just curious as to whether someone shining a 1W laser (IR to Blue wavelength) into the lens of something like a speed camera would cause permanent damage to it.
Absolutely. Even staring at intense
> Just curious as to whether someone shining a 1W laser (IR to Blue wavelength) into the lens of something like a speed camera would cause permanent damage to it.
LED light over prolonged time periods
can cause permanent eye damage. I
remember the mandatory safety training
classes at LBNL(when I was working as
a research associate) and it was drilled
in by the instructor to NEVER, EVER look directly at any lighted up laser. Even
laser pointers can cause eye damage to
both the user and others if used
carelessly.
Michael A. Terrell
Aug 22, 2014, 8:52:25 AM8/22/14
to
Jim Thompson wrote:
>
> I caused the City of Phoenix some grief by timing yellow cycles of
> non-camera intersections versus those with red-light cameras, then
> posted the data to the editorial pages of every newspaper in town.
>
> (Non-camera intersections averaged 1.5 seconds longer than those with
> cameras.)
some idiot knocks them out, the lights won't change.
--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.
Spehro Pefhany
Aug 22, 2014, 9:23:58 AM8/22/14
to
On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 08:52:25 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>Jim Thompson wrote:
>>
>> I caused the City of Phoenix some grief by timing yellow cycles of
>> non-camera intersections versus those with red-light cameras, then
>> posted the data to the editorial pages of every newspaper in town.
>>
>> (Non-camera intersections averaged 1.5 seconds longer than those with
>> cameras.)
>
>
> New intersections around here have four cameras to detect cars. If
>some idiot knocks them out, the lights won't change.
If they don't have a fall-back mode on sensor failure some civil
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>Jim Thompson wrote:
>>
>> I caused the City of Phoenix some grief by timing yellow cycles of
>> non-camera intersections versus those with red-light cameras, then
>> posted the data to the editorial pages of every newspaper in town.
>>
>> (Non-camera intersections averaged 1.5 seconds longer than those with
>> cameras.)
>
>
> New intersections around here have four cameras to detect cars. If
>some idiot knocks them out, the lights won't change.
servant needs to be cashiered
--sp
George Herold
Aug 22, 2014, 10:09:59 AM8/22/14
to
On Friday, August 15, 2014 4:34:08 AM UTC-4, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
> Just curious as to whether someone shining a 1W laser (IR to Blue wavelength) into the lens of something like a speed camera would cause permanent damage to it.
Hmm, 1 Watt focused down onto a small area of the CCD array could certainly cause some localized heating. How much and any damage are open questions.
> Just curious as to whether someone shining a 1W laser (IR to Blue wavelength) into the lens of something like a speed camera would cause permanent damage to it.
George H.
Sylvia Else
Aug 22, 2014, 9:51:08 PM8/22/14
to
On 15/08/2014 6:34 PM, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
> Just curious as to whether someone shining a 1W laser (IR to Blue wavelength) into the lens of something like a speed camera would cause permanent damage to it.
>
Use a high pressure cleaner with added abrasive grit.
> Just curious as to whether someone shining a 1W laser (IR to Blue wavelength) into the lens of something like a speed camera would cause permanent damage to it.
>
Sylvia.
Maynard A. Philbrook Jr.
Aug 22, 2014, 9:59:03 PM8/22/14
to
Sylvia Else
Aug 22, 2014, 10:15:51 PM8/22/14
to
experimentalists.
Sylvia.
Maynard A. Philbrook Jr.
Aug 23, 2014, 2:42:38 PM8/23/14
to
In article <c5qbqn...@mid.individual.net>, syl...@not.at.this.address
says...
Excellent answer.
Jamie
says...
Jamie
josephkk
Aug 23, 2014, 4:31:07 PM8/23/14
to
fraud as sensor failure into a call mode is a standard requirement nation
wide.
?-)
Michael A. Terrell
Aug 24, 2014, 4:14:04 PM8/24/14
to
replacement every time the road has to be repaved. They can change a
failed camera without closing an intersection.
k...@attt.bizz
Aug 24, 2014, 5:59:28 PM8/24/14
to
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 16:14:04 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
intersection. The camera is not needed to operate the lights. If the
controls fail, the safe state should be similar, or blinking reds at a
minimum.
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>josephkk wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 09:23:58 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
>> <spef...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:
>>
>> >On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 08:52:25 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
>> ><mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>Jim Thompson wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I caused the City of Phoenix some grief by timing yellow cycles of
>> >>> non-camera intersections versus those with red-light cameras, then
>> >>> posted the data to the editorial pages of every newspaper in town.
>> >>>
>> >>> (Non-camera intersections averaged 1.5 seconds longer than those with
>> >>> cameras.)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> New intersections around here have four cameras to detect cars. If
>> >>some idiot knocks them out, the lights won't change.
>> >
>> >If they don't have a fall-back mode on sensor failure some civil
>> >servant needs to be cashiered
>> >
>> >--sp
>>
>> Not only that the vending/manufacturing company needs to be prosecuted for
>> fraud as sensor failure into a call mode is a standard requirement nation
>> wide.
>
>
> The county installs and maintains the equipment. The loops require
>replacement every time the road has to be repaved. They can change a
>failed camera without closing an intersection.
But the fail-safe state should be a "normally functioning"
>
>josephkk wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 09:23:58 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
>> <spef...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:
>>
>> >On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 08:52:25 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
>> ><mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>Jim Thompson wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I caused the City of Phoenix some grief by timing yellow cycles of
>> >>> non-camera intersections versus those with red-light cameras, then
>> >>> posted the data to the editorial pages of every newspaper in town.
>> >>>
>> >>> (Non-camera intersections averaged 1.5 seconds longer than those with
>> >>> cameras.)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> New intersections around here have four cameras to detect cars. If
>> >>some idiot knocks them out, the lights won't change.
>> >
>> >If they don't have a fall-back mode on sensor failure some civil
>> >servant needs to be cashiered
>> >
>> >--sp
>>
>> Not only that the vending/manufacturing company needs to be prosecuted for
>> fraud as sensor failure into a call mode is a standard requirement nation
>> wide.
>
>
> The county installs and maintains the equipment. The loops require
>replacement every time the road has to be repaved. They can change a
>failed camera without closing an intersection.
intersection. The camera is not needed to operate the lights. If the
controls fail, the safe state should be similar, or blinking reds at a
minimum.
Jim Thompson
Aug 24, 2014, 6:04:38 PM8/24/14
to
failure defaults to blinking red in all directions (sometimes blinking
yellow on the main thoroughfare, blinking red on the side street).
>The camera is not needed to operate the lights. If the
>controls fail, the safe state should be similar, or blinking reds at a
>minimum.
cycle the lights based on load... nothing detected, they run on a
timed schedule.
k...@attt.bizz
Aug 24, 2014, 6:59:22 PM8/24/14
to
hung when the camera went out.
>>The camera is not needed to operate the lights. If the
>>controls fail, the safe state should be similar, or blinking reds at a
>>minimum.
>
>The cameras aren't actually cameras, but motion and IR detectors to
>cycle the lights based on load...
recognition. Fewer false indications and they can "see" motorcycles,
bicycles, etc.
>nothing detected, they run on a
>timed schedule.
josephkk
Aug 24, 2014, 9:38:51 PM8/24/14
to
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 16:14:04 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
if you know what you are doing. BTDT. At least two through lanes in each
direction on each approach.
?-)
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>josephkk wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 09:23:58 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
>> <spef...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:
>>
>> >On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 08:52:25 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
>> ><mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>Jim Thompson wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I caused the City of Phoenix some grief by timing yellow cycles of
>> >>> non-camera intersections versus those with red-light cameras, then
>> >>> posted the data to the editorial pages of every newspaper in town.
>> >>>
>> >>> (Non-camera intersections averaged 1.5 seconds longer than those with
>> >>> cameras.)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> New intersections around here have four cameras to detect cars. If
>> >>some idiot knocks them out, the lights won't change.
>> >
>> >If they don't have a fall-back mode on sensor failure some civil
>> >servant needs to be cashiered
>> >
>> >--sp
>>
>> Not only that the vending/manufacturing company needs to be prosecuted for
>> fraud as sensor failure into a call mode is a standard requirement nation
>> wide.
>
>
> The county installs and maintains the equipment. The loops require
>replacement every time the road has to be repaved. They can change a
>failed camera without closing an intersection.
Ususally. Also you can replace the loops without closing the intersection
>
>josephkk wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 09:23:58 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
>> <spef...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:
>>
>> >On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 08:52:25 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
>> ><mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>Jim Thompson wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I caused the City of Phoenix some grief by timing yellow cycles of
>> >>> non-camera intersections versus those with red-light cameras, then
>> >>> posted the data to the editorial pages of every newspaper in town.
>> >>>
>> >>> (Non-camera intersections averaged 1.5 seconds longer than those with
>> >>> cameras.)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> New intersections around here have four cameras to detect cars. If
>> >>some idiot knocks them out, the lights won't change.
>> >
>> >If they don't have a fall-back mode on sensor failure some civil
>> >servant needs to be cashiered
>> >
>> >--sp
>>
>> Not only that the vending/manufacturing company needs to be prosecuted for
>> fraud as sensor failure into a call mode is a standard requirement nation
>> wide.
>
>
> The county installs and maintains the equipment. The loops require
>replacement every time the road has to be repaved. They can change a
>failed camera without closing an intersection.
if you know what you are doing. BTDT. At least two through lanes in each
direction on each approach.
?-)
josephkk
Aug 24, 2014, 9:46:41 PM8/24/14
to
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 15:04:38 -0700, Jim Thompson
>
>>The camera is not needed to operate the lights. If the
>>controls fail, the safe state should be similar, or blinking reds at a
>>minimum.
>
>The cameras aren't actually cameras, but motion and IR detectors to
>cycle the lights based on load... nothing detected, they run on a
>timed schedule.
Not in the lest bit true. I have been there at way too many installations
>>The camera is not needed to operate the lights. If the
>>controls fail, the safe state should be similar, or blinking reds at a
>>minimum.
>
>The cameras aren't actually cameras, but motion and IR detectors to
>cycle the lights based on load... nothing detected, they run on a
>timed schedule.
over the years. I am also familiar with the typical agency
specifications, manufacturer's products etc., for many years. It is
mostly standard definition color cameras these days. Signals are more and
more coordinated or traffic responsive since the late 1970s. The new
systems have system wide 2D traffic flow optimizing computers (a tarted up
PC running specialty software).
>
> ...Jim Thompson
Michael A. Terrell
Aug 25, 2014, 12:10:07 AM8/25/14
to
traffic did in the '60s.
Michael A. Terrell
Aug 25, 2014, 12:11:41 AM8/25/14
to
alters the cycle.
Michael A. Terrell
Aug 25, 2014, 12:21:02 AM8/25/14
to
Have you ever dealt with FDOT? It takes Florida three years to build a
road that would take three months in other states. When they were
building the interchange on US 441 and 19 in Eustis florida they had a
brand new piece of heavy equipment sink into the ground, never to be
recovered. I don't know what mix they use for asphalt, but it wears out
quickly around here. The main road near here has had workers there for
over a month to repave a half mile, out to the main highway. It is just
two lanes, with a short turn lane into a school near the highway.
They are now working to the west of 35th Ct. The month was from there,
east to 441 (Which Google refers to as 301, even though all the signs
are 441.):
<https://www.google.com/maps/place/SE+95th+St,+Ocala,+FL+34480/@29.0843661,-82.0946202,15z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x88e7d17b3211bd65:0xcc0953989e067558>
k...@attt.bizz
Aug 25, 2014, 12:15:39 PM8/25/14
to
On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 00:10:07 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
That's an entirely different thing than failing altogether. "Degraded
mode", is just that.
mode", is just that.
Charles Edmondson
Aug 25, 2014, 12:57:55 PM8/25/14
to
In article <isGdnQfzqK0oJGfO...@earthlink.com>,
mike.t...@earthlink.net says...
processing to detect vehicle presence and activity. Remember Jim, I was
in this business for a little while... ;-)
As for loops, 3M designed some neat little magnetometer things that you
just drilled a 2" hole in the asphalt and cut a slot to the edge of the
road and hooked them up. They went down about 3" below the roadway, so
you could repave over them without damage. They then went into a
digital lane card, and looked like the cat's meow for this application.
The companies that sold loop equipment fixed that, though. They had the
'official' standards ban anything other than inductive loops and analog
lane cards. They did this at both the state and federal levels!
Charlie
mike.t...@earthlink.net says...
> >
> > Ususally. Also you can replace the loops without closing the intersection
> > if you know what you are doing. BTDT. At least two through lanes in each
> > direction on each approach.
>
>
First, they are usually full up NTSC cameras, doing some image
> > Ususally. Also you can replace the loops without closing the intersection
> > if you know what you are doing. BTDT. At least two through lanes in each
> > direction on each approach.
>
>
processing to detect vehicle presence and activity. Remember Jim, I was
in this business for a little while... ;-)
As for loops, 3M designed some neat little magnetometer things that you
just drilled a 2" hole in the asphalt and cut a slot to the edge of the
road and hooked them up. They went down about 3" below the roadway, so
you could repave over them without damage. They then went into a
digital lane card, and looked like the cat's meow for this application.
The companies that sold loop equipment fixed that, though. They had the
'official' standards ban anything other than inductive loops and analog
lane cards. They did this at both the state and federal levels!
Charlie
mako...@yahoo.com
Aug 25, 2014, 5:00:38 PM8/25/14
to
On Monday, August 25, 2014 12:57:55 PM UTC-4, Charles Edmondson wrote:
> In article <isGdnQfzqK0oJGfO...@earthlink.com>,
>
> mike.t...@earthlink.net says...
>
> > >
>
> > > Ususally. Also you can replace the loops without closing the intersection
>
> > > if you know what you are doing. BTDT. At least two through lanes in each
>
> > > direction on each approach.
>
> >
>
> >
>
>
>
> First, they are usually full up NTSC cameras, doing some image
>
> processing to detect vehicle presence and activity. Remember Jim, I was
>
> in this business for a little while... ;-)
>
>
>
yes agreed, the cameras for red light tickets are not the same as the cameras for controlling the left turn arrows.
> In article <isGdnQfzqK0oJGfO...@earthlink.com>,
>
> mike.t...@earthlink.net says...
>
> > >
>
> > > Ususally. Also you can replace the loops without closing the intersection
>
> > > if you know what you are doing. BTDT. At least two through lanes in each
>
> > > direction on each approach.
>
> >
>
> >
>
>
>
> First, they are usually full up NTSC cameras, doing some image
>
> processing to detect vehicle presence and activity. Remember Jim, I was
>
> in this business for a little while... ;-)
>
>
>
the red light cameras are usually mounted on large seperate poles with strobe light fash when triggered.
the controller cameras are smaller and usually mounted right on the same structure as the traffic lights.
these controller cameras are our friends, they really do help traffic flow.
Mark
SecretLaserAgentMan
Aug 27, 2014, 2:14:54 PM8/27/14
to
I've had a grad student destroy a vidicon tube with 5 mW of 632.8 nm light focused by a good lens.
If you had a good quality one watt static beam, with good Gaussian qualities, you could easily damage a silicon CCD.
On the other hand, with a Wicked Lasers Artic as mentioned earlier, your odds are 50/50.
Killing the CCD is different from damaging it. If you destroy the right spot, you get saturated vertical rows on the CCD. Otherwise you get a few black spots.
Steve
If you had a good quality one watt static beam, with good Gaussian qualities, you could easily damage a silicon CCD.
On the other hand, with a Wicked Lasers Artic as mentioned earlier, your odds are 50/50.
Killing the CCD is different from damaging it. If you destroy the right spot, you get saturated vertical rows on the CCD. Otherwise you get a few black spots.
Steve
0 new messages