<html>
<head>
<style type="text/css">
<!--
body { margin-top: 4px; margin-bottom: 1px; margin-left: 4px; line-height: normal; margin-right: 4px; font-variant: normal }
p { margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0 }
-->
</style>
</head>
<body style="margin-top: 4px; margin-bottom: 1px; margin-left: 4px; margin-right: 4px">
<p style="margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 0">
<font size="3" face="Comic Sans MS">Stephen,</font> </p>
<br>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 0">
<font size="3" face="Comic Sans MS">You didn't explicitly mention it, but TIME might be an additional item to include, as in different vehicles will take different amounts of time to traverse. Once you ave a good set of constants for the different types of vehicles, you could add in "Time to Traverse" as a graph indicator.</font> </p>
<br>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 0">
<font size="3" face="Comic Sans MS">I would also lobby for the downhill sections for inclusion in a Bicycling report. As in this route is generally less strenuous, etc. :c)</font> </p>
<br>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 0">
<font size="3" face="Comic Sans MS">This next one is getting a little out there, but combining the elevation with Weather conditions might prove useful in extremes, either in height or in extreme weather (or both). </font> </p>
<br>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 0">
<font size="3" face="Comic Sans MS">Adding in Flood plains might be another interesting exercise, might not be much call for this though, generally.</font> </p>
<br>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 0">
<font size="3" face="Comic Sans MS">bobb</font> </p>
<br> <br>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 0">
<br>
<br>
>>> Stephen Woodbridge <woodbri@swoodbridge.com> wrote:<br> </p>
<div style="margin-top: 0; padding-left: 7px; border-left: solid 1px #050505; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 15px; margin-right: 0; background-color: #f3f3f3">
<p style="margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 0">
Hi all,<br><br>(This is cross posting from the pgrouting list, sorry for the dups.)<br><br>I have preprocessed some shapefile data and added elevation information<br>in the Z value of the coordinates. I'm wondering how to best utilize<br>that in routes and would like any thoughts or ideas you might be willing<br>to share.<br><br>The obvious answer is to wrap the elevation data into the cost values as<br>this is simple and straight forward and does not require code changes.<br>This brings me to what have other people done or thought about doing in<br>this regard?<br><br>Here are some random thoughts I have had on this in no particular order:<br><br>o for bicycles, we probably only care about UP grade and length. This<br>would imply that segments need to be in a directed graph with different<br>costs going from A-B vs. B-A based on the upgrade<br><br>o for trucks, maybe an un-directed graph is ok, because they need to use<br>low gear both up and down depending on the grade and length<br><br>o for motorcycles, hilly terrain tends to mean more twisty roads which<br>are more fun to ride so lower costs for roads with lots of elevation<br>changes.<br><br>grade = (rise / run) * 100<br><br>where run should be the 2D length of the segment.<br><br>Is there a "standard" way of factoring grade into the route calculations?<br><br>Doing some google searches, most all papers I saw related to fuel and<br>emissions and did not seem to be very applicable to the above.<br><br>Thanks,<br>   -Steve W<br>_______________________________________________<br>Discuss mailing list<br>Discuss@lists.osgeo.org<br><a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
</p>
</div>
</body>
</html>