daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Highways & Autobahns

Highways & Autobahns All about automobility



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old June 15th, 2016, 11:52 AM   #3781
MattiG
Registered User
 
MattiG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Espoo FI
Posts: 1,791
Likes (Received): 612

Quote:
Originally Posted by hammersklavier View Post
I suspect the use of snow chains primarily affects the pavement, rather than the subsurface roadbed. It's also worth pointing out that several other nations (the other Nordics, the U.S., Canada, China, Russia, Japan, and maybe South Korea?) have motorways in similar climatic conditions as Norway; the use of snow chains therefore appear to have a marginal effect on the overall maintenance cycle.

Your point about the subsurface conditions is much more interesting. Norway is old and mountainous; most other motorways in cold mountainous environments run through far younger and therefore looser terrain. The greater expense associated with building for this terrain may well cancel out the cost savings associated with not expecting as much truck traffic.
Well...

At least in the Nordics, snow chains are not used on motorways as a routine. Instead, studded tires are in common use, especially in the northern areas where traffic volumes are low enough to live without salting. The main roads are repaved regularly as the studs make grooves on the pavement.

The roadbed is not any problem in the Nordics: It is built strong enough to resist the heavy forces caused be repeating freezing and melting. Every country has a lot knowledge on building roads in the arctic areas. Studs (and passenger cars in general) have virtually no impact on the roadbed, but its lifecycle is dependent on the volume and characteristics of heavy traffic.

In general, most of the cost to build does not come from the road and roadbed itself but from more complex structures likes bridges, junctions, tunnels, telematics, etc.

Quite a big chunk of the maintenance cost goes to keeping to roads in use in the winter. The Oslo-Bergen route climbs quite high, regardless which corridor is selected, and the winter conditions may be extreme. The maintenance cost can be reduced by investing in tunnels, which are expensive to build.
__________________

Mathias Olsen liked this post
MattiG está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old June 15th, 2016, 01:51 PM   #3782
Mathias Olsen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 125
Likes (Received): 149

Quote:
Originally Posted by berlinwroclaw View Post
the alternative section E134 Seljestad - Vagsli - Gvammen with 23 km tunnels.
This section E134 Seljestad- Vagsli – Gvammen is in fact about Grungedal – Gvammen. Seljestad – Vagsli is not relevant here, because there is not discussion about it. At Grungedal the existing E134 goes to Vinje, Amot and Seljord. The alternative you discussed is about a shortcut between Grungedal and Gvammen that will save 30 minutes and will have a better impact on society.
Actual additional improvements for safety and journey time are now evaluated for the section Grungedal – Gvammen, the so called “Rauland option”.



The proposed section is in study within the Road Administration and a test case for the balance national priority over local priority.

Will the local politicians win by a section over Seljord and Amot?
Or will the central government win by putting focus to national interest of a fast Bergen-Oslo road via Rauland?
Netto social benefits show that the Rauland option has a positive balance of 12 billion, while an update of the present road via Seljord will have a negative balance of 1 billion. The Seljord option will have a lost capital of 13 billion. Therefore the Road Administration has chosen the Rauland section and that is a very good contribution for a fast road Bergen-Oslo, because it will save 30 minutes.
http://www.vegforumov.no/trase-via-r...134/#more-1013

The update of the present road is including a tunnel already under construction from Arhus to Gvammen.
The Rauland option has 15 km of the road in tunnels to make it possible that the travelling time on the E139 motorway Bergen-Oslo will be reduced to 3,5 hours or less and will be better for the environment in Seljord, Amot and Gvammen.

Last edited by Mathias Olsen; June 15th, 2016 at 02:03 PM.
Mathias Olsen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 01:59 PM   #3783
Mathias Olsen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 125
Likes (Received): 149

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattiG View Post
Quite a big chunk of the maintenance cost goes to keeping to roads in use in the winter. The Oslo-Bergen route climbs quite high, regardless which corridor is selected, and the winter conditions may be extreme. The maintenance cost can be reduced by investing in tunnels, which are expensive to build.
Tunnels are indeed the best solution for sustainable roads in high areas between Bergen and Oslo. To reduce the costs, road roofs against snow or landslides may also help and can be cost effective. The proposed new 3 Haukeli new tunnels on E134 by Road Administration do not ensure 100% snow free passage. But by connecting the 3 tunnels with road roofs it will be possible to have such a snow free passage of Bergen-Oslo.

image hosted on flickr


Offtopic: It also helps against landslides

__________________

Turf liked this post
Mathias Olsen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 04:29 PM   #3784
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
I won't be going on E4 this trip, I'll take E45 south from Östersund.
I hope you like trees ;-)
__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 04:45 PM   #3785
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

Quote:
Originally Posted by hammersklavier View Post
I suspect the use of snow chains primarily affects the pavement, rather than the subsurface roadbed. It's also worth pointing out that several other nations (the other Nordics, the U.S., Canada, China, Russia, Japan, and maybe South Korea?) have motorways in similar climatic conditions as Norway; the use of snow chains therefore appear to have a marginal effect on the overall maintenance cycle.

Your point about the subsurface conditions is much more interesting. Norway is old and mountainous; most other motorways in cold mountainous environments run through far younger and therefore looser terrain. The greater expense associated with building for this terrain may well cancel out the cost savings associated with not expecting as much truck traffic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattiG View Post
Well...

At least in the Nordics, snow chains are not used on motorways as a routine. Instead, studded tires are in common use, especially in the northern areas where traffic volumes are low enough to live without salting. The main roads are repaved regularly as the studs make grooves on the pavement.

The roadbed is not any problem in the Nordics: It is built strong enough to resist the heavy forces caused be repeating freezing and melting. Every country has a lot knowledge on building roads in the arctic areas. Studs (and passenger cars in general) have virtually no impact on the roadbed, but its lifecycle is dependent on the volume and characteristics of heavy traffic.

In general, most of the cost to build does not come from the road and roadbed itself but from more complex structures likes bridges, junctions, tunnels, telematics, etc.

Quite a big chunk of the maintenance cost goes to keeping to roads in use in the winter. The Oslo-Bergen route climbs quite high, regardless which corridor is selected, and the winter conditions may be extreme. The maintenance cost can be reduced by investing in tunnels, which are expensive to build.
Studded tires (and use of snow chains for tractors etc. and trucks without proper tires on slippery conditions) are of course only a problem for the top layer, which hence has to be maintained more often than further south. Sorry if I was not clear on that, but the durability of pavement, and hence maintenance intervals vary greatly. With top layer I actually meant the pavement, but in extreme cases also the next layer (usually asphalt on main roads) could be affect.

There are of course known solutions to heave, and as I mentioned in my initial post, the solution is to use a thick enough layer that is drained and isolate against the ground, in practice crushed rock ("pukk"). However, this has a cost, and you don't have to drive far in Norway before you discover that this is a investment cost that has not always been allowed, leading to increased costs in the long run and / or a bumpy road from after the first winter ad infinitum. A rather recent example of this is E-14 expressway east of Kløfta (used to be Rv 2):


Heave is most important to consider when the road is built on ground with varying quality, eg sand and clay, and of least problem if built directly on solid rock. In the latter case you just need to make sure that the road builder itself do no introduce sand etc that could lead to heave.
__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!

Last edited by 54°26′S 3°24′E; June 15th, 2016 at 04:59 PM.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 04:48 PM   #3786
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,568
Likes (Received): 19354

Trees is what Sweden is all about E4 is too much of a detour, it's already 250 km to Sundsvall from here, before you turn south. I have a 2000 kilometer drive back home ahead of me, so I'll take E45 and then E20. I plan to drive it in three days, starting tomorrow. I prefer to drive only half a day on the last day, from southern Denmark to NL, so I have some time at home before turning in for the night. 2000 km in two days - half of it on two-lane roads - is too exhaustive for me.
__________________

my clinched highways / travel mapping • highway photography @ Flickr and Youtube

54°26′S 3°24′E liked this post
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 05:32 PM   #3787
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,525
Likes (Received): 21227

My freeway only record of solo single day driving is 1640km... 1000km on a single day with 2 Lane roads is tiring though
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 06:23 PM   #3788
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

Off-topic, and not something to brag about, but in my younger and, I believe, more stupid days, I performed a couple of solo drives of the order of 1000 km, both on 2-lane roads and freeways, for two days in a row, and on several continents. The record non-stop (and in hindsight reckless) drive was however 2 500 km. There were more people in the car, but I had to do most of the driving, particularly towards the end. Definitely not recommended.

I would not mind if some legal limit and control were introduced for long distance driving for private cars. Maybe not as strict as for trucks today, but there should be some kind of control.
__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 06:27 PM   #3789
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,568
Likes (Received): 19354

Do people drive Trondheim - Narvik in one day? I saw a sign past Trondheim that said Narvik 900 km. That seems awful far on two-lane roads. I feel tired after driving 6 hours in the mountains of western Norway.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 08:08 PM   #3790
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

I am sure someone does. For most people (at least Norwegians), however, air would probably be the choice of transportation from Trondheim to anything from around Bodø and northwards. Driving by car is only relevant if you have a lot of luggage or are on a car holiday. In the latter case you probably want make some stops....




__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!

ChrisZwolle, cinxxx, gr_kanev, Turf liked this post

Last edited by 54°26′S 3°24′E; June 15th, 2016 at 09:02 PM.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 10:56 PM   #3791
MattiG
Registered User
 
MattiG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Espoo FI
Posts: 1,791
Likes (Received): 612

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
I am sure someone does. For most people (at least Norwegians), however, air would probably be the choice of transportation from Trondheim to anything from around Bodø and northwards. Driving by car is only relevant if you have a lot of luggage or are on a car holiday. In the latter case you probably want make some stops....
I have made 20+ tourist trips in Norway. In my opinion, the E6 section Trondheim-Narvik-Skibotn is quite boring. Of course, there are highlights like Saltfjellet, but for most of these 1150 kilometers the road goes through endless forests. In July-August, the E6 is mainly for Germans and Italians making their pilgrimage to Nordkapp. If they spent a few days more, they could enjoy the coastal road 17 and the scenic areas in the southwest Norway.
MattiG está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 11:16 PM   #3792
MattiG
Registered User
 
MattiG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Espoo FI
Posts: 1,791
Likes (Received): 612

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post

There are of course known solutions to heave, and as I mentioned in my initial post, the solution is to use a thick enough layer that is drained and isolate against the ground, in practice crushed rock ("pukk"). However, this has a cost, and you don't have to drive far in Norway before you discover that this is a investment cost that has not always been allowed, leading to increased costs in the long run and / or a bumpy road from after the first winter ad infinitum. A rather recent example of this is E-14 expressway east of Kløfta (used to be Rv 2):
Aaargh. Anything similar is seldom visible on the Finnish main road network, except some experimental legs. We have quite strict technical standards for the roadbed in various conditions. It money is to be saved, Finland cuts down the number of horizontal kilometers while Norway seems to save in vertical centimeters.

(E16, It think, not E14.)

Quote:
Heave is most important to consider when the road is built on ground with varying quality, eg sand and clay, and of least problem if built directly on solid rock. In the latter case you just need to make sure that the road builder itself do no introduce sand etc that could lead to heave.
This is one of the extreme spots in Finland: It is a hidden 6-lane bridge on 4/7/E75 in Helsinki. The motorway crosses a swamp and the solid earth is found at the depth of 30 meters. The bridge was built in early 1970's and it still is the #2 bridge in Finland by area. Quite a few people know it is a bridge.

__________________

54°26′S 3°24′E, tonttula liked this post
MattiG está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 11:17 PM   #3793
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,525
Likes (Received): 21227

I think Nordkkap must be one of those off-the-way attractions that are wildly more popular with foreigners than locals who are used to similar or resembling surroundings.
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 11:19 PM   #3794
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,568
Likes (Received): 19354

Nordkapp is probably not the most scenic part of Norway anyway. Isn't it much more interesting to go to Lofoten?
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 11:24 PM   #3795
MattiG
Registered User
 
MattiG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Espoo FI
Posts: 1,791
Likes (Received): 612

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
I think Nordkkap must be one of those off-the-way attractions that are wildly more popular with foreigners than locals who are used to similar or resembling surroundings.
True. But after visiting this once-in-a-lifetime sight, I recommend taking a trip to Havøysund, Gamvik, Berlevåg or Hamningberg. Less people and more interesting nature. And no expensive entrance fees.
__________________

gr_kanev liked this post
MattiG está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 11:30 PM   #3796
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,525
Likes (Received): 21227

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Nordkapp is probably not the most scenic part of Norway anyway. Isn't it much more interesting to go to Lofoten?
I want to drive someday all the way there for the lulz and to check the ever-shorter trees (in a much gradual transition than climbing an alpine road, e.g., due to latitude, not altitude).

But if/when I do it, I'd probably use Rv7 and drive back via Finland/Sweden

I think there might be so interesting ice fields in the mountains east of Glomfjord, they have many national parks there apparently.
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 11:33 PM   #3797
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,525
Likes (Received): 21227

Anyway, are there plans to roll out complete electrical charging infrastructure to Nordkap, and all along E16 and Rv-7?
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 16th, 2016, 09:32 AM   #3798
Mathias Olsen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 125
Likes (Received): 149

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
Anyway, are there plans to roll out complete electrical charging infrastructure to Nordkap, and all along E16 and Rv-7?
There will be plans in future. Norway first needs to establish good coverage of electric charging on motorways, E6 Svinesund-Hamar, E18, E39 Kristiansand-Stavanger and on E134 Bergen-Oslo.

Check out for yourself electric charging stations in Europe: https://ev-charging.com/de/en

Last edited by Mathias Olsen; June 16th, 2016 at 09:38 AM.
Mathias Olsen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 16th, 2016, 10:15 AM   #3799
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattiG View Post
I have made 20+ tourist trips in Norway. In my opinion, the E6 section Trondheim-Narvik-Skibotn is quite boring. Of course, there are highlights like Saltfjellet, but for most of these 1150 kilometers the road goes through endless forests. In July-August, the E6 is mainly for Germans and Italians making their pilgrimage to Nordkapp. If they spent a few days more, they could enjoy the coastal road 17 and the scenic areas in the southwest Norway.
I wholeheartedly disagree with you. Granted, Rv 17 is one of the most beautiful long distance drives I am aware, but it is fairly slow, and not something you want to drive twice in your holiday. On your return trip there are no better alternative than E6, which, in my opinion, overall is one of the most interesting long distance drives Norway has to offer. Granted, unless you like forests, the 220 km section Snåsa - Mosjøen can be a bit tedious, but not any more than the average rural road of South - Eastern Norway, and it is certainly more varied than the E45 Chris just has endured. The rest of the route you defined varies between beautiful and spectacular in my book, with highlights such Tysfjord (with Stetind which I showed above, 4th picture), Ranafjorden, and Ofoten. Personally I also really like inner Troms and the drive along the historic farming landscape along Trondheimsfjorden. In general I prefer the landscapes of Northern Norway to that in the Southwestern Norway. In Northern Norway the landscape is generally more open such that actually are able to see the mountains better. In poor weather, driving along a narrow fjord in western Norway can be quite depressing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Nordkapp is probably not the most scenic part of Norway anyway. Isn't it much more interesting to go to Lofoten?
The Nordkapp area is very scenic, but it is also a very long drive even from most parts of Norway. It is also a tourist trap, but you do not have to enter the platou. In of my many favorites in Northern Norway is Senja. It is as beautiful as Lofoten, but with far less tourists.
__________________

Turf liked this post

Last edited by 54°26′S 3°24′E; June 16th, 2016 at 10:23 AM.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 16th, 2016, 12:38 PM   #3800
berlinwroclaw
Kamienna
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 139
Likes (Received): 46

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
The Nordkapp area is very scenic, but it is also a very long drive even from most parts of Norway.
Why travelling such a long distance, while comfortable other areas are within handreach? Such as here on E134 near existing 1x2 Røldalstunnelen.





Røldal looks as a nice tourist area. The steep mountains may look nice in summer for tourists, but blocks the road frequently in winter. In winter it is a paradise for wintersport, but a hell in for Bergen-Oslo drivers.





Norway deserves a motorway between East and West. Better for business and for tourism.
__________________
Have a safe trip!

gr_kanev liked this post
berlinwroclaw no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
norway

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 04:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium