Does anyone have a smart way of designing in Speed humps to a residential road with kerbs?
I have a few ideas all of which a a pain:
1. create a new sub-assembly which has the road level raised to the max level of the hump. Then use the custom frequency to mark the bottom of the ramp and it should work out the rest.
2. Create a 2nd profile on the longsection in the place of the speed hump then add an addtional corridor in each location over the top of the normal. I would then use the paste surface command to create the final contour plan.
As you can tell these are not very elegant. Any other ideas?
What longitudinal shape do these "highly visible admissions of planning
Are they "ramp-flat-ramp", or "Watts profile" or some other?
One simple approach is to complete the design without them, then create
a grading object of the hump and paste it to the road design surface model.
> Does anyone have a smart way of designing in Speed humps to a residential road with kerbs?
> I have a few ideas all of which a a pain:
> 1. create a new sub-assembly which has the road level raised to the max level of the hump. Then use the custom frequency to mark the bottom of the ramp and it should work out the rest.
> 2. Create a 2nd profile on the longsection in the place of the speed hump then add an addtional corridor in each location over the top of the normal. I would then use the paste surface command to create the final contour plan.
> As you can tell these are not very elegant. Any other ideas?
I wouldn't model this unless this high level of detail was needed in section
The change in the contour is minimal. I would probably use an expression in
a surface label to raise the grade to height of the speed bump & just throw
some labels on the plan at the speed bump location.
If the design changes, you will need to edit the speed bumps. If you use
gradings & need to explode them (I believe this is still the recommend best
practice for stability), they will need to be rebuilt.
If you simply label the speed bumps & the design changes, the speed bumps
need no additional revision time.
Why model a speed bump when this is likely an engineering detail?
Over-modeling, in my opinion, is the source of many of the problems/challenges associated with "model based design technology" (not BIM by the they way, which I know is going to open a can of worms).
If you're needing to create a 3D model for visualization/analysis fair enough, but you really need to think about how your design information is going to be used. Many contractors construct from hard copy plan/profile drawings. Many also use design points that are uploaded to survey total station / GPS equipment for field surveyors. Machine controlled grading is sometimes used in larger projects.
I continuously run into designs where enormous amounts of effort have been put into trying to create the perfect model, when in actuality, most of that detailed information is never used. It may look pretty, but not very useful from a practical scenario.
Having said that every situation is different and it really helps to know what you're delivering as part of the design process, and how that information is going to be used.
For once I was not trying to hilarious. If you have a design where you
need speed humps to make it functional, then the design IS a result of
planning failure and the speed humps are the visible admittance of that
It amazes me here where I see roads that for various reasons have gone
out of shape and Authorities spend a fortune re-building them to make
them smooth and finally tack on speed humps to make them rough again.
Speed humps also ensure:
an increase in wear and tear on the vehicles using the road,
increases of noise levels as drivers accelerate back to operating speed
the occasional flying motor cycle
increased construction costs
increased driver resentment
If they must be used and there is enormous political pressure to use
them in many circumstances, then, although harder to build, the Watts
profile is by far the best shape to use.