3 ms·
This is an interesting idea, but I'm sceptical of the advantages. "there is more Co2" is valid for cars burning fuel. But as soon as you recuperate (even in a
by schobi 2y ago
This is an interesting idea, but I'm sceptical of the advantages.
"there is more Co2" is valid for cars burning fuel. But as soon as you recuperate (even in a hybrid) you might only have a fraction of the losses any more. Adjusting the speed more aggressively is possible, without breaking, with little loss. I totally agree that stop-and-go is annoying, but looking into the future, Co2 should not be a reason for the vehicles in 5-10 years when the research can be rolled out.
Is "slamming the brakes" still happening? Around here you have dynamic speed limit signs on the highway. In high traffic everybody then goes a little slower, but smoothly.
I suspect that if a road is loaded beyond max throughput, this method will also fail, even harder.
Let me explain: I remember a graph from communications theory. With improving error correcting codes in transmission, you can get a clean signal for even worse channel conditions. But once it fails you will not have a signal any more. The better the code, the steeper the cutoff. Whereas without in FM radio, the degrade in user experience is also gradual.
So the analogy goes like this: I would expect that you could possibly load the road with another 10% more vehicles. But if one day you have 15% more, the blockage will be even worse than before.
Could be worth simulating throughput for various loading situations.