←back to thread

How good are American roads?

(www.construction-physics.com)
193 points chmaynard | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
jameshart ◴[] No.42194610[source]
This is a great analysis but it does focus exclusively on ‘roughness’, which is obviously important but isn’t the be-all-end-all of road quality.

One area I notice in particular that roads in the northeast US subjectively feel worse than Europe is in quality of road markings. Constant plow scraping and harsh salting seems to destroy markings.

I think it also shows up in the overall fit and finish of road infrastructure - edging and barriers, signage, lighting, maintenance of medians, how curbs and furniture contribute to junction legibility… and of course bridges.

One major reason is that European countries typically have national road agencies and consistent standards across the country (because, generally, smaller and less federal). US’s patchwork of federal, state and local road maintenance leads to vastly different budgets and department priorities across the network.

replies(9): >>42194735 #>>42194896 #>>42195496 #>>42196027 #>>42196214 #>>42196762 #>>42198273 #>>42199203 #>>42199580 #
mannykannot ◴[] No.42195496[source]
While I agree on your additional criteria, I feel the roughness metric itself (at least as explained here) is not as informative as it could be: a generally smooth road surface with sudden discontinuities in level (e.g.potholes) seems qualitatively worse (and damaging) than would be a smoothly-varying one with the same roughness. Perhaps an alternative metric might be based on the maximum speed at which a typical car or truck could travel without experiencing vertical accelerations above a certain threshold? ('typical', here would be with regard to things like its mass, suspension travel and stiffness, and wheelbase.)
replies(1): >>42195935 #
wubrr ◴[] No.42195935[source]
The metric might already account for the scenario you bring up, since a road with potholes will be more 'rough' than a smoothly varying one based on my understanding of this metric.
replies(1): >>42196595 #
mannykannot ◴[] No.42196595{3}[source]
I thought about that, but this is what I had in mind: take a section (say 100 M) of an undulating road, smooth it out, then put a ridge across it that restores its roughness to its initial value. My feeling is that the latter would be more of a problem (this opinion is colored by the fact that, in my neighborhood, road repair is creating bumps and ridges like this.)
replies(1): >>42196902 #
1. wubrr ◴[] No.42196902{4}[source]
I guess it would depend on how big the ridge you add would have to be. I'm not at all an expert on this, but my thinking is that a ridge of size 2X would have an exponential effect on the travel of the suspension and resulting IRI value when compared to a ridge of size X. So a perfectly smooth road with a ridge of height 2X would have a higher IRI than the same road with 2 ridges of size X.

The wikipedia article has more details on how the measurements are done (there are multiple different ways/instruments used which can have different results) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_roughness_index

> The IRI is based on the concept of a 'golden car' whose suspension properties are known. The IRI is calculated by simulating the response of this 'golden car' to the road profile. In the simulation, the simulated vehicle speed is 80 km/h (49.7 mi/h). The properties of the 'golden car' were selected in earlier research[12] to provide high correlation with the ride response of a wide range of automobiles that might be instrumented to measure a slope statistic (m/km).