h a l f b a k e r yNormal isn't your first language, is it?
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
| |
Speed limits are usually determined based on how the road was constructed, not the other way around. |
|
| |
agreed BJS, but there are more fatal accidents than I am comfortable with, so clearly the system isn't entrely effective, and needs a change |
|
| |
I'm a little confused by the language in
this idea. In racing terms, the apex is
the point of the bend where the inside
tyres touch, nearly touch or go well over
the kerb (depending on the type of
kerb, car and race). You can't follow an
apex. It isn't a line. |
|
| |
The reason why drivers touch the apex
in a race (a point that changes
depending on the car, road, tyres,
conditions and driving style) is
(simplistically put) to make the driven
radius wider than the road's actual
radius. The racing line isn't anything
magical -- it's just the best way of
using the a track surface. |
|
| |
To create a road can be driven faster
(not necesarily a good idea)
means increasing the radius of the
turns and the width of the lanes
(because little errors get bigger at
speed). |
|
| |
To create a road that can be driven
safer (something I'm greatly in favour
of) means many things. Too me it
means making roads predictable and
speed limits and warnings consistent. |
|
| |
Could you help me understand how not finding the apex in a bend makes you crash. I'm a little fuzzy on that point. |
|
| |
right, well in racing terms, an apex is defined as "the point a car should touch on the inside of a turn when following a proper line ". |
|
| |
so im saying, make the road follow this imaginary line that pretty much only F1 drivers can see. |
|
| |
vis a vis, a medium left, wouldn't be a smooth L shaped bend, but rather one with a more angles. |
|
| |
shinobi, I don't believe that you
understand the racing line (either that
or I don't understand you). It is not a
magic line. It is just the fastest way
around a particular piece of tarmac. |
|
| |
Step 1: I take Michael Schumacher
round a corner (telling him to go fast)
and mark the line he takes. |
|
| |
Step 2: I then alter the road layout so
that the path that Michael took will be
in the centre of the lane. |
|
| |
Step 3: I take Michael back to the
altered corner to check that I've made
the changes correctly. |
|
| |
He will take a different line. The original
line he took was the fastest for that
piece of tarmac. Now that the corner
layout has changed, the racing line will
also have changed. |
|
| |
The racing line, apexing at a corner is
the fastest way around a particular
piece of tarmac. Change the tarmac and
the line will change. |
|
| |
Following steps 1 to 3 iteratively will
result in a piece of tarmac with a
gradually increasing radius, eventually
turning into a straight line. |
|
| |
I think this idea is basically to make roads with more gradual turns so the speed limit can be increased to how fast people normally drive (over the speed limit). But this would only lead to people driving even faster which would still be just as dangerous, it would actually be more dangerous because of the higher speed if there was a crash. |
|
| |
Generally racing drivers fit somewhere between two extremes. Some trust the car a lot and go for as close to a constant radius - greater than the road's radius - as possible throughout the curve. Some are more cautious and prefer a gradually-increasing radius, i.e. a part-spiral path, a technique known as late-apexing. |
|
| |
With some cars one would be nuts not to late-apex. The original Porsche 911 is considered an example of such a car. One turns more tightly during the first part of the curve, when one is going more slowly, then gradually relaxes the line as one accelerates through the curve. This is generally a safe and sensible approach to cornering. |
|
| |
The trick would then be to build the road to the abovementioned part-spiral path. If the road takes traffic in both directions, one would need two spiral segments, one within the other. The result would be that the road would be wider at one point about a quarter of the way along the curve. One might introduce a built or painted island at this point. |
|
| |
[BJS] has a point. Narrow, fiddly roads can also be more fun, and are then more fun at lower speeds. But curves cambered the wrong way, and curves with suddenly-tightening radii, can catch one unawares. |
|
| |