The study’s results showed that the settings and location where a cycle crosses the loop, not the design and installation, are mainly responsible for the poor detection of small vehicles.

The good news is that the loops are able to pick up bicycles, so no change in technology should be necessary to make lights work properly. Unfortunately though,

many engineers and technicians are reluctant to use higher sensitivity levels because the settings may cause detection of highly conductive vehicles in adjacent lanes and may cause cross talk or interference between loops.

There are a few types of newer loops that fair much better at picking up bicycles, the layout of the induction loop is fundamentally different. There are also a number of cities putting down paint over the loops, instructing cyclists where to sit, to maximize the chances they are detected. Both of these are steps RIDOT could take as they repair or replace current loops to help out cyclists.

I road into work a different way this morning and had problems tripping the light. It didn’t have any pedestrian light controls, so the workaround would have done me no good. I’ll have to check and see whether it’s a RIDOT or Barrington maintained road. Somewhere I have an email with a link to a site listing RIDOT maintained roads, I’ll try and dig this up and post it on the site.

For those who may not know, if you can see the cuts in the pavement where the sensor loop is installed, the most sensitive position is directly over one of the cut lines, and especially at a corner. The sensors work on changes in induction in an electric field, not magnetic fields, so any metal (not just ferrous metal/steel) will trip them, even the aluminum in your wheels.

In most cases if a light goes through 2 cycles or 3 minutes without detecting you, it is legal to consider it defective and ride through it when traffic conditions allow. Otherwise, that pedestrian-signal method, though silly, is also a valid option.