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 September 14th, 2014, 12:30 AM   #301
NordikNerd
Rail & Road traveller
 
NordikNerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Linköping
Posts: 2,747
Likes (Received): 1408



2+1 road with crash barrier. The trucks slow down the pace on these roads, no overtaking possible for 2 km, just slow down.
NordikNerd no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old September 14th, 2014, 12:38 AM   #302
Kanadzie
Registered User
 
Kanadzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,373
Likes (Received): 746

No wonder the rate of suicide is high in Sweden
__________________

BriedisUnIzlietne liked this post
Kanadzie no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 14th, 2014, 05:17 PM   #303
RV
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Porvoo
Posts: 726
Likes (Received): 275

As i've always said: the tendency to of building 2+1-roads instead of a very low additional price to pay for narrow 2+2 is ridiculous on AADT 7000-15 000 roads. And then you still have to upgrade to 2+2 later.
__________________

sponge_bob, devo liked this post
RV no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 14th, 2014, 07:32 PM   #304
BriedisUnIzlietne
Registered User
 
BriedisUnIzlietne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Breda/Riga
Posts: 3,535
Likes (Received): 2896

Only if you think that the AADT is going to constantly increase. Maybe Sweden thinks that the oil will run out, and people will cycle to work and eat homegrown potatoes instead of driving to the supermarket?
__________________

RV liked this post
BriedisUnIzlietne no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2014, 02:41 AM   #305
verfmeer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 174
Likes (Received): 51

In Holland, 2x1 roads with 20 000 vehicles per day are normal, and shouldn't be changed. 2x2 is only build when more then 30 000 vehicles use them daily. So I think the Swedish shouldn't complain here, especially since long distance traffic can use the nearby E4, which is 2x2.
verfmeer no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2014, 03:58 AM   #306
sponge_bob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,949
Likes (Received): 2199

2+1 roads are a complete waste of time, 2+2 with no hard shoulder is the same cost, safer, and more effective.

The Swedes, especially, found this out over time and through a process of trying to upgrade dangerous 1+1 roads or stopping wasting money on wide 1+1 with large hard shoulders. So did Ireland, Finland and Portugal.

Large hard shoulders on 1+1 are no longer required because modern cars in countries with mandatory car inspection regimes are much more reliable and do not need a hard shoulder for breakdowns any more.

So the Swedes are right, you build 1+1 or 2+2 and no more 2+1. 2+1 should ONLY be used for climbing lanes and ONLY in places where you need to get a 1+1 over a mountain.
__________________

RV liked this post
sponge_bob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2014, 09:11 AM   #307
MattiG
Registered User
 
MattiG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Espoo FI
Posts: 1,794
Likes (Received): 613

Quote:
Originally Posted by RV View Post
As i've always said: the tendency to of building 2+1-roads instead of a very low additional price to pay for narrow 2+2 is ridiculous on AADT 7000-15 000 roads. And then you still have to upgrade to 2+2 later.
Most of the 2+1 roads in Sweden are originally 1+1 roads. The conversion cost was rather marginal compared to newbuilds.

The road construction cost is almost directly proportional to the area of the road, especially in arctic areas. Therefore, building 2+2 roads is not a marginal cost increase only to 2+1 roads.
MattiG está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2014, 04:28 PM   #308
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,572
Likes (Received): 19366

Yep, many Swedish 2+1 roads were created on formerly very wide two-lane roads (wider than in most of Europe). This resulted in a very low conversion cost, while a four-lane expansion would likely require a much more expensive reconstruction and widening of the road.

2+1 is fine at most locations in Sweden, where traffic volumes are routinely under 15,000 vehicles per day.

The only real 2+1 road in the Netherlands (N50) is another story though. It carries 30,000 vehicles per day and needs upgrade to four lanes. 2+1 roads are not suitable for this kind of traffic volumes.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2014, 04:37 PM   #309
Wilhem275
The Transporter
 
Wilhem275's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Genoa & Venice [I]
Posts: 2,731
Likes (Received): 766

Being stuck behind a truck is not a big deal... they always keep a constant speed, the higher permitted to them, and going a steady 80 instead of 90 is fine.

Their problem is that they really waste a lot of time approaching and leaving intersections.
__________________
I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrooke, and by gum, it put them on the map!
Well, sir, there's nothing on earth like a genuine, bona fide, electrified, six-car monorail!

Marchionne means never having to say you're sorry.

Due to Photobucket f*cking up, most images won't be visibile in my old posts. If you need anything specific, please write me.

Road_UK liked this post
Wilhem275 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2014, 07:20 PM   #310
ElviS77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 564
Likes (Received): 54

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Yep, many Swedish 2+1 roads were created on formerly very wide two-lane roads (wider than in most of Europe). This resulted in a very low conversion cost, while a four-lane expansion would likely require a much more expensive reconstruction and widening of the road.

2+1 is fine at most locations in Sweden, where traffic volumes are routinely under 15,000 vehicles per day.
In addition, many of these roads aren't grade-separated expressways ("motortrafikled") either, where local traffic would have other options and slow-moving traffic would be banned, but rather rural highways with at-grade intersections. Thus, a complete realignment or rebuild would be required for a 2+2 motorway. Many if not most such sections would see a much lower AADT than even 15000, 4-8000 is not uncommon.
ElviS77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2014, 07:30 PM   #311
Road_UK
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Mayrhofen AT, Sneek NL, Bromley UK
Posts: 5,855
Likes (Received): 1599

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilhem275 View Post
Being stuck behind a truck is not a big deal... they always keep a constant speed, the higher permitted to them, and going a steady 80 instead of 90 is fine.

.
I agree. Plus you always have that advantage of having something to look forward to when the road becomes dual again. And people like me will not waste an inch of road to overtake the buggers when that happens
Road_UK no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2014, 08:17 PM   #312
sponge_bob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,949
Likes (Received): 2199

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElviS77 View Post
In addition, many of these roads aren't grade-separated expressways ("motortrafikled") either, where local traffic would have other options and slow-moving traffic would be banned, but rather rural highways with at-grade intersections. Thus, a complete realignment or rebuild would be required for a 2+2 motorway. Many if not most such sections would see a much lower AADT than even 15000, 4-8000 is not uncommon.
You can have 2+2 NON Motorway but the lack of hard shoulder and some at grade intersections plus the alignment will mean it is speed limited around 100kph.

Here is a Finnish section of 2+1 on National Road 5



Simply Lose the hard shoulders, add wire median barrier, reduce lanes to 3.5m wide each and you have enough space for a 2+2 no problemos! No change to land take and alignement required.
__________________

RV liked this post

Last edited by sponge_bob; September 15th, 2014 at 08:28 PM.
sponge_bob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2014, 08:42 PM   #313
devo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 221
Likes (Received): 41

I wouldn't call that proper hard shoulders (3m +), the road needs some shoulders or similar (curb). So I'm sceptical to converting this section to a decent four lane solution.
devo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2014, 08:47 PM   #314
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,572
Likes (Received): 19366

Roads need to be a little wider than just 4 lane widths. There needs to be at least 0.75 m of pavement on either side of the carriageway between the lanes and barrier / soft shoulder.

0.75 m + 3.5 m + 3.5 m + 0.75 m <barrier> 0.75 m + 3.5 m + 3.5 m + 0.75 m
__________________

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

sponge_bob liked this post
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2014, 10:10 PM   #315
Shifty2k5
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Uppsala
Posts: 535
Likes (Received): 157

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Roads need to be a little wider than just 4 lane widths. There needs to be at least 0.75 m of pavement on either side of the carriageway between the lanes and barrier / soft shoulder.

0.75 m + 3.5 m + 3.5 m + 0.75 m <barrier> 0.75 m + 3.5 m + 3.5 m + 0.75 m
Sweden builds plenty of 2x2 roads that are just 16 meters wide and those work fine. Usually they have a speedlimit of 100 kph.

Example:

https://www.google.se/maps/@56.90523...5JjA!2e0?hl=sv
Shifty2k5 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2014, 10:17 PM   #316
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,572
Likes (Received): 19366

They work fine as long as there are not high volumes of (truck) traffic. You don't want a 16 meter wide road with high traffic volumes. A regularly designed motorway (4 lanes, shoulders, median barrier) is usually up to 27 - 28 meters wide.

Lanes could be narrower than 3.5 m when there is a 100 km/h speed limit though.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2014, 10:22 PM   #317
Jevpls
Registered User
 
Jevpls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Riga
Posts: 230
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by BriedisUnIzlietne View Post
V512 (soon to be A12/E22) 2+1 road in Latvia. AFAIK the only 2+1 road (except some hill climbs) in the country.
https://www.google.com/maps/@56.3926...8nETCkWBeQ!2e0

There is no barrier and it's a broken white line so you can overtake. The extra lane is to accommodate lorry queues, not to accommodate high AADT which on this road, when it is complete, will probably be only 1825 - like on the road that this will replace.
Well, it's hard to call this one as 2+1 road. The extra lane is for resting trucks mostly and drivers actually do not have any benefits. They simply don't have to wait or to overpass lots of trucks. And there is no need for REAL 2+1 - as you said, AADT is quite low.
By the way, Latvian road regulation LVS 190:2 (crossections) has got NP15,5 as a 2+1 road crossection but it has got a barrier. As far as I know, there is no such road in Latvia.
Jevpls no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2014, 10:22 PM   #318
MattiG
Registered User
 
MattiG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Espoo FI
Posts: 1,794
Likes (Received): 613

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Roads need to be a little wider than just 4 lane widths. There needs to be at least 0.75 m of pavement on either side of the carriageway between the lanes and barrier / soft shoulder.

0.75 m + 3.5 m + 3.5 m + 0.75 m <barrier> 0.75 m + 3.5 m + 3.5 m + 0.75 m
The Finnish standard for a narrow 2+2 road having the speed limit 100 km/h is 1.50+3.50+3.50+2.00+3.50+3,50+1.50 = 19.00 m. If a concrete divider is used instead of a tube-shaped one, 0.30 meters is to be added.

A narrower road (17.70 m) is allowed, if the speed limit is 80 km/h,

The current route 5 between Lusi and Mikkeli is not a continuous 2+1 road but a 1+1 one with 2+1 sections. The width is 12.00 m on the 1+1 sections and 17.50 m on 2+1 sections. Thus no way to convert it to a 2+2 road by just adding dividers and paint.
__________________

ChrisZwolle liked this post
MattiG está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2014, 10:28 PM   #319
sponge_bob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,949
Likes (Received): 2199

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Roads need to be a little wider than just 4 lane widths. There needs to be at least 0.75 m of pavement on either side of the carriageway between the lanes and barrier / soft shoulder.

0.75 m + 3.5 m + 3.5 m + 0.75 m <barrier> 0.75 m + 3.5 m + 3.5 m + 0.75 m
No, it can be 0.5m on the verge and the 2 x 0.75m in the middle INCLUDES the wire barrier not separately, this gives you 0.5m back Chris.

0.5 m + 3.5 m + 3.5 m + 1.5m *inc barrier + 3.5 m + 3.5 m + 0.5

Example > http://nrastandards.nra.ie/road-desi...bdf70/no_html1

I stress again that this is a rural or low-medium traffic 100kph expressway standard but a very safe one that can cope with 30k AADT before it starts to get seriously congested. It can also cope with stormy Irish weather and blustery crosswinds.

2+1 maxes out practically at 18k-22k AADT depending on LOS and the danger penalties get high after that point ...mainly 2 impatient drivers not giving way at the end of the 2 bit and colliding.

EDIT, Matti got there before me.

Last edited by sponge_bob; September 15th, 2014 at 11:13 PM.
sponge_bob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2014, 10:35 PM   #320
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,572
Likes (Received): 19366

Road authorities cutting cost by building substandard four-lane highways doesn't mean it's always a good idea Design standards are there for a reason.

You can build very narrow roads. Is it safe? Maybe, depends on the situation, such as the traffic volumes, truck share, curvature & geometry, etc.

Some road authorities / policymakers also seem to think that the minimum design standards are also the maximum design standards (just look at any roundabout in the Netherlands... )
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

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 07:37 AM.


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