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 April 24th, 2009, 01:09 AM   #241
bubach_hlubach
hlubach bubach
 
bubach_hlubach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 7,387
Likes (Received): 161

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post

While they advertise with the best speed to reach a certain fuel economy, it's in my opinion more important if you can reach a constant speed. Going from 0 - 80 km/h all the time on main roads through villages is less fuel efficient than doing 120 km/h on a freeflowing freeway.
Your opinion is totaly valid, cannot agree more.
I also try to mantain a steady speed as much as road conditions and traffic flow allow it, and gliding in neutral on the blissfully unbusy highways can also make my day

__________________
Do you believe a love could run so strong?
Do you believe a love could pass you by?


'Cause I can't go on (Will you still love me?)
No, I can't go on (Just say you love me)
bubach_hlubach no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 24th, 2009, 01:21 AM   #242
bubach_hlubach
hlubach bubach
 
bubach_hlubach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 7,387
Likes (Received): 161

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrissib View Post
And what about a company car whre you don't have to pay the fuel?
I ain't got nothing more to say about that If I were your boss I'd put you on the blacklist, and make your company car wear a big rose sticker - "How's my driving? Call toll free num. 666 xxx 022" As long as you manage not to attract any complaints you got the job, bud.

__________________
Do you believe a love could run so strong?
Do you believe a love could pass you by?


'Cause I can't go on (Will you still love me?)
No, I can't go on (Just say you love me)
bubach_hlubach no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2009, 08:21 AM   #243
keber
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 9,878
Likes (Received): 1364

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
While they advertise with the best speed to reach a certain fuel economy, it's in my opinion more important if you can reach a constant speed. Going from 0 - 80 km/h all the time on main roads through villages is less fuel efficient than doing 120 km/h on a freeflowing freeway.
True. For now I had lowest fuel consumption, when I had to drive whole day on motorway with low traffic and had cruise control set to 130 km/h (although this is over 4k rpm for my car). Using cruise control on motorway helps lowering fuel consumption for around 10 % (at least in my case).
keber no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2009, 09:34 AM   #244
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,591
Likes (Received): 19378

Quote:
Originally Posted by keber View Post
Using cruise control on motorway helps lowering fuel consumption for around 10 % (at least in my case).
Yes, I heard that. I also heard automatic transmission increases fuel consumption by 10%.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2009, 09:46 AM   #245
Total
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 46
Likes (Received): 0

As i got it, old automatic transmission were inefficient because of their design, but modern should be ok, since after it switches gear it blocks the slipping... i dont know how is situation on current cars. are cheap cars with automatic transmission "modern" nowdays?

As for safest/most economic speed for me is around 90-110 on motorway, but i guess it depends on the car. If your engine RPM drops too low it is not economic! So you have to find just the sweet spot. and as for safety, i guess, driving too slow on motorway is maybe even more dangerous than reasonable speeding.

Well i hope someone got something interesting from this, cuz i believe most of it is just basic stuff

Wanted to ask... I guess everyone knows that you can save some gas on driving behind truck for example, and for long runs it is considerable amount. I was wandering, how do truck drivers think about that? is it bothering to have "freeloaders on your tail"? I mean if they are "cool" (phlegmatic?) enough to do something like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmvtFog2zLo Why bother if someone is behind you...

And what is minimum legal distance you can get to the another vehicle without breaking the law, as i got it, in some countries they monitor it on cameras very rigorously? 2 sec rule?

Thanks!

Last edited by Total; April 24th, 2009 at 10:06 AM.
Total no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2009, 09:30 PM   #246
RawLee
Registered User
 
RawLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Budapest
Posts: 9,447
Likes (Received): 1083

Do you drive? The legal distance is breaking distance,so depends on the vehicle. Going close enough to a truck to save that much fuel is basically suicide.
RawLee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2009, 09:51 PM   #247
x-type
con los terroristas
 
x-type's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bjelovar [HR]
Posts: 13,465
Likes (Received): 3437

120-130 is optimum for my punto. it is fast enough, safe enough, and over it consumption rises significantly. however, at open road doing 90 it consumpts much less. difference is not that low as Chris has shown in my case.
__________________
Svaki dan sanjam autobahn...
x-type no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2009, 10:20 PM   #248
FM 2258
Registered User
 
FM 2258's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,438
Likes (Received): 612

My personal speed limit is 90mph. In the United States I think all freeways should have a speed limit of 85 in the city and no speed limit out in the rural areas.
FM 2258 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2009, 10:53 PM   #249
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,591
Likes (Received): 19378

85 mph in urban areas... that's never gonna work because

a) it reduces capacity = more traffic jams
b) it would create a lot more of turbulention around exit-rich areas
c) it would generate significantly more noise to the surrounding areas
d) it would increase accidents, because urban freeways are too busy to handle such speeds
e) freeways are not designed for such speeds, especially not in urban areas with 1930's - 1950's design standards.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2009, 11:14 PM   #250
Jeroen669
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 787
Likes (Received): 13

Quote:
Originally Posted by RawLee View Post
Most efficient IMO is any speed that is near the lower RPMs,in whichever gears.
Be it 50 in 3rd or 130 in 5th,both require the same amount of work from the engine(not actual values,just to give you an ide what I try to say).
Driving in a too low rpm won't be efficient either though. Most cars can run 50-60 km/h in 5th gear, but I doubt if that would be the least consuming speed... (in km/l)
Jeroen669 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2009, 07:12 PM   #251
Exethalion
Remember Me
 
Exethalion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Stuttgart
Posts: 845
Likes (Received): 645

Quote:
Originally Posted by FM 2258 View Post
My personal speed limit is 90mph. In the United States I think all freeways should have a speed limit of 85 in the city and no speed limit out in the rural areas.
Well thank God you aren't the States' Transport Secretary, or else we'd be looking at a ridiculously high accident rate, and dreadful traffic flow to boot.
Exethalion no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2009, 03:39 AM   #252
Aerin
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 126

Engineering Software?

I don't know if this has been asked already, but for those who are working in the field of transportation, what engineering design program do you use?
Aerin no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2009, 03:12 PM   #253
Mateusz
Registered User
 
Mateusz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,536
Likes (Received): 235

I suppose you are looking for stuff like CAD
Mateusz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2009, 03:22 PM   #254
EricIsHim
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 4,397
Likes (Received): 28

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aerin View Post
I don't know if this has been asked already, but for those who are working in the field of transportation, what engineering design program do you use?
Depends on which sub-field of transportation are you talking about, and which region in the world you are in...

Here are some examples:
Highway design - AutoCAD or Microstation etc.
Capacity analyses - Transyt, Trafficware Synchro, Highway Capacity Software, PASSER, Sydra etc.
Signal phasing and timing - Transyt, Trafficware Synchro, Highway Capacity Software, PASSER, Sydra etc.
Planning - TransCAD, PTV VISSUM etc.
Microsimulation - Trafficware SimTraffic, PTV VISSIM, Panramics, CORSIM etc.
__________________
EricIsHim
My PhotoBucket
EricIsHim no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2009, 03:45 PM   #255
J N Winkler
Road enthusiast
 
J N Winkler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oxford
Posts: 265
Likes (Received): 1

It is never just one piece of software. A CAD program of some sort is essential for drawing up plans for road and bridge construction. But in order to produce plans for a complete project you will need the following as well (these can be either standalone programs or bolt-ons to the main CAD package):

* A civil engineering design package like Geopak or Inroads to assemble ground information (staking reports, etc.) and survey data into a digital model of the terrain through which the finished road will pass

* Specialized packages to perform flow computations for drainage structures like culverts, to develop design details for elements like direction signs, etc.

In the USA the vast majority of state DOTs have standardized on MicroStation as their CAD package. Some DOTs use Geopak for civil engineering design, while others use Inroads. The most popular signing CAD program in the US (available either as a MicroStation MDL or as an AutoCAD bolt-on) is SignCAD, although GuidSIGN is also popular.

In the UK digital terrain models are developed in a separate program, called MOSS, and then imported into AutoCAD for further design work. The sign design program that is considered most competent for professional work is KeySign, which is available as an AutoCAD bolt-on. The main advantage of KeySign is that it allows designs to be produced that do not conform strictly with the design guidelines and so will, e.g., completely fill a sign panel of standard dimensions without the need to use aircraft grey backing boards. There is a very popular competitor, SignPlot, which is a standalone program (it will print directly to PDF) and does not offer much flexibility in terms of dimensioning signs outside the guidelines.

Elsewhere in western Europe, Denmark seems to like MicroStation, while both MicroStation and AutoCAD are rivals in Spain, and AutoCAD seems to rule in France. Each country has at least one preferred sign design package. In France two appear to be in wide use--one is called Corine and produces landscape-format sign drawings, while the other (whose name I do not know) produces portrait-format drawings. In Spain there is just one package I am aware of, which has the capability (not always deployed in practice) to produce fully dimensioned landscape-format sign drawings with the producing company's name in the upper right-hand corner.

With the exception of Britain, these European countries show a marked preference for direction sign designs in full color. British designers tend to prefer keyline drawings for ease of B&W reproduction, although some designers may use filled letters for legend in Transport Heavy. US guide sign designs are almost always in B&W (monochrome Group IV TIFF is a very popular format for distributing plans electronically), though the precise format can vary from keylines to black background fills. The method of presenting sign designs I like best uses filled characters and borders to avoid bare keylines to the extent possible (aside from shield outlines).

Edit: The other French sign design package, which seems to have the larger market share, is called Sherpa.

Last edited by J N Winkler; July 31st, 2009 at 03:54 PM.
J N Winkler no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2009, 06:49 PM   #256
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,591
Likes (Received): 19378

I use AutoCAD.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2009, 09:46 PM   #257
keber
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 9,878
Likes (Received): 1364

I use it too, and add-on software for AutoCad for designing roads and railways.
keber no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2009, 10:26 PM   #258
J N Winkler
Road enthusiast
 
J N Winkler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oxford
Posts: 265
Likes (Received): 1

I have used both AutoCAD and MicroStation, and personally I prefer the latter because it has a more intuitive interface for batch-plotting jobs. (I occasionally have to batch-plot when I get files in CAD format only.) I have never been able to get AutoCAD to plot to PDF without leaving annoying artifacts, like thin strips of white in color fills and what look like serifs on unserifed text. These are easiest to see in Acrobat when it is set to smooth line art.
J N Winkler no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2009, 10:27 PM   #259
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,591
Likes (Received): 19378

Quote:
Originally Posted by J N Winkler View Post
I have never been able to get AutoCAD to plot to PDF without leaving annoying artifacts, like thin strips of white in color fills and what look like serifs on unserifed text. These are easiest to see in Acrobat when it is set to smooth line art.
Yeah, I have that problem too, what's up with that?
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2009, 10:41 PM   #260
J N Winkler
Road enthusiast
 
J N Winkler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oxford
Posts: 265
Likes (Received): 1

I wish I knew. All I know is that I don't have this problem when I plot AutoCAD drawings in MicroStation (it can read them, believe it or not, although I am not sure it supports all of the recent releases of AutoCAD): it gives me smooth color fills all the time. It's not a reliable workaround, however, because sometimes MicroStation misinterprets borders, and turns them into random bubbles of color fill.

My best guess is that there is some feature or aspect of AutoCAD's plotting engine which leads it to use an excessive number of overlapping polygons for color fills. You don't see this problem with drawing text or simple keylines, but it is pretty hard to avoid with full-color sign drawings because those use color fills extensively.
J N Winkler no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
highways, parking

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 12:56 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