-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
add penatly for steeper slopes #4
Comments
If you set uphillcutoff+cost 0.5/80, |
Fastbike-elevation2.zip I have taken as the baseline the simple standard Fastbike profile. I have set these modification:
way context:
The slopes 0.5% have no penalization But the slopes 0.5%-3.0% have gradually applied U/DCF, what weakens the total penalty: The disadvantage is, you have to dedicate U/DCF to this management of "2-speed elevation penalty" , as they cannot then be used for the original purpose, i.e. different way costfactor eveluation, based on slope status. |
@poutnikl thanks for your help on this |
@utack Be aware the total segment cost has to be >= 1.0, so elevation cost rate upward must be steeper than CF rate downwards. Expect some strange things as elevations is due buffering sometimes redistributed to the neightbour segments. It is possible the values of elevationpenaltybuffer and elevationmaxbuffer will need some adjustments. |
This is the last "big" thing I want to implement right now |
@poutnikl could I in theory: So it gradually "blends" from the normal costfactor to the uphillcostfactor? Should that give me for an 8% slope Or do I misunderstand the elevationbufferreduce |
See how it i implemented in the latest beta(develop branch) Trekking template and the Wiki Glossary item for Elevation buffer. It may be better to use exact names Do you mean uphillcostfactor = 4 * costfactor ? And yes, from your case description, you would get effective_costfactor= 0.5 * costfactor + 0.5 uphillcostfactor. Do not forget to consider uphill equivalent of distance cost (7.5 * 10 * uphillcost) m/km |
steeper slopes are annoying to not manageable, they should get more penatly on top of normal elevation cost
Discussion about that
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/osm-android-bikerouting/yIu72_FimNI
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: