Originally Posted by
Kagehitokiri
even if they continue to research interchanges, i dont understand why the concept of traffic lights cannot evolve into something without always having regular intervals
Most newer systems are the 'activated' type, where traffic flow determines cycle lengths. Los Angeles has one of the best traffic light systems in the US with constant monitoring of more than 4000 of its traffic signals. I can get into more detail on the different types of traffic signals, but it's a big can of worms that I don't want to open.
To the OP - there are two main advantages to these interchanges:
1. Protected turns (less crashes)
2. More throughput capacity due to less cycles required on the traffic signal.
As for the 'newness' of a concept - when you change road markings or install something minor - 2 weeks is usually what you need for >90% of the drivers to adjust.
When you introduce a new concept - it's a few years. In places where people know how to drive it takes a year or two. In places where they don't, like the US [where you don't need to know how to drive to get a license, you just need to know how to press two pedals - hopefully not both at the same time - turn the steering wheel and follow signs] - it takes longer.
BTW. There's a variation of this concept called the
SPUI which is also better at handling traffic than the conventional interchange, but doesn't require overlapping traffic lanes.