Whispering asphalt

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
16 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Whispering asphalt

amilopowers
Hello

I used to live in Fribourg, Switzerland where they put "whispering asphalt" on one of the main roads in order to prevent noise. You can barely hear an EV now, but that is another story.

Since we have quite a lot of discussions about noise pollution I thought it might be a good idea to implement a tag for that.

surface=whispering_asphalt or surface=silent_asphalt came to my mind but I don't know what the official term for that aspahlt in English is. In German we call it "Flüsterbelag" or "Flüsterasphalt".

Then I found on Overpass-Turbo someone that tagged "asphalt:type=porous". [1] Since I don't work in that area I don't know for sure if this is the same thing as I imagine and I found only one Wikipedia article in German [2] about that asphalt I mean.

I personally prefer one of my first ideas, since I hate to add another key/value if I can say it in one.

I look forward to hear your thoughts and comments.

Regards
Ueli (amilopowers)



----
Sent from ProtonMail, encrypted email based in Switzerland.



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

signature.asc (875 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Whispering asphalt

Tod Fitch
I have not heard of “whispering asphalt” but I know that in some areas of the state I live in they have been using a porous asphalt on roads to provide better traction during rain storms.

So I am not sure if the current uses of “asphalt:type=porous” would be to indicate pavement designed for good traction in the rain or if it was for making a less noisy road.

From taginfo, it looks like asphalt:type has only been used a few times and always with the value of porous. And it looks like they are all in the one area you found with your overpass query. Perhaps the original mapper could be contacted to see what they were trying to describe.

Cheers!
Tod

On May 2, 2019, at 12:55 PM, [hidden email] wrote:

Signed PGP part
Hello

I used to live in Fribourg, Switzerland where they put "whispering asphalt" on one of the main roads in order to prevent noise. You can barely hear an EV now, but that is another story.

Since we have quite a lot of discussions about noise pollution I thought it might be a good idea to implement a tag for that.

surface=whispering_asphalt or surface=silent_asphalt came to my mind but I don't know what the official term for that aspahlt in English is. In German we call it "Flüsterbelag" or "Flüsterasphalt".

Then I found on Overpass-Turbo someone that tagged "asphalt:type=porous". [1] Since I don't work in that area I don't know for sure if this is the same thing as I imagine and I found only one Wikipedia article in German [2] about that asphalt I mean.

I personally prefer one of my first ideas, since I hate to add another key/value if I can say it in one.

I look forward to hear your thoughts and comments.

Regards
Ueli (amilopowers)



----
Sent from ProtonMail, encrypted email based in Switzerland.





_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Whispering asphalt

Paul Allen
In reply to this post by amilopowers
On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 20:57, <[hidden email]> wrote:

I used to live in Fribourg, Switzerland where they put "whispering asphalt" on one of the main roads in order to prevent noise. You can barely hear an EV now, but that is another story.

Since we have quite a lot of discussions about noise pollution I thought it might be a good idea to implement a tag for that.

surface=whispering_asphalt or surface=silent_asphalt came to my mind but I don't know what the official term for that aspahlt in English is. In German we call it "Flüsterbelag" or "Flüsterasphalt".

Then I found on Overpass-Turbo someone that tagged "asphalt:type=porous". [1] Since I don't work in that area I don't know for sure if this is the same thing as I imagine and I found only one Wikipedia article in German [2] about that asphalt I mean.

I'd not heard of this stuff (no pun intended) so I did some googling.  As Tod responded, those of
us who aren't obsessed by asphalt would assume that porous asphalt was intended for
drainage.  And porous asphalt is indeed used to improve drainage.  But it can also be used for noise
it seems that the US term for porous asphalt used for noise reduction is "quiet asphalt."  In the
UK the generic term for low noise surfaces is "low noise surfaces."

I wouldn't use porous_asphalt for several reasons:

1) It might be porous for drainage and have little or no effect on noise.

2) It might be something other than asphalt.

3) It might be asphalt but with grooves rather than being porous (there's more than one way
to reduce the noise).

I wouldn't use "silent" or "quiet" in the tag despite the US calling it "quiet asphalt" because it's
quietER not quiet.  So "noise reducing" or something along those lines.

Given that many types of surface might have low noise, we probably need to keep it independent
of the surface material, otherwise we'll end up with noise_reducing_asphalt,
noise_reducing_concrete, etc.

So, an idea to be taken behind the bikesheds and kicked to death...  surface:noise_reducing=yes.
I'll take the first kick - what do we do when noise_reducing becomes the norm and then
somebody invents extra_noise_reducing.  And the second kick - how often are we going to
be able to choose between two routes, one of which is noise-reducing and one isn't, will
routers support it and will anybody ever want to choose low noise over shortest route or
fastest route?  Third kick - it may be important to those living nearby, but they won't need a map
to know if the road is noisy or not.

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Whispering asphalt

Florian Lohoff-2
In reply to this post by amilopowers
On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 07:55:40PM +0000, [hidden email] wrote:

> Hello
>
> I used to live in Fribourg, Switzerland where they put "whispering
> asphalt" on one of the main roads in order to prevent noise. You can
> barely hear an EV now, but that is another story.
>
> Since we have quite a lot of discussions about noise pollution I
> thought it might be a good idea to implement a tag for that.
>
> surface=whispering_asphalt or surface=silent_asphalt came to my mind
> but I don't know what the official term for that aspahlt in English
> is. In German we call it "Flüsterbelag" or "Flüsterasphalt".
>
> Then I found on Overpass-Turbo someone that tagged
> "asphalt:type=porous". [1] Since I don't work in that area I don't
> know for sure if this is the same thing as I imagine and I found only
> one Wikipedia article in German [2] about that asphalt I mean.
>
> I personally prefer one of my first ideas, since I hate to add another
> key/value if I can say it in one.
>
> I look forward to hear your thoughts and comments.
The point is that when you invent a new value for surface a lot of
consumers will assume it to be some kind of bad/worse surface and
reduce the average speed to expect.

I'd rather propose surface=asphalt asphalt=whisper or the like.

asphalt:type would also be okay with me. There are more likely 100s of types
of asphalt.

Flo
--
Florian Lohoff                                                 [hidden email]
        UTF-8 Test: The 🐈 ran after a 🐁, but the 🐁 ran away

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Whispering asphalt

Yuri Astrakhan-2
I don't think we should do asphalt classification -- too difficult for many cases, and very little value, especially in this case because it is not the "type" of asphalt, it is rather a "feature" of asphalt. Multiple features could exist in the same asphalt - e.g. it could have noise-canceling qualities, or it could have under-surface charging, or it could have solar panels integrated into it, or it could have high melting point so it works well under sun.

In other words, I think it should be a yes flag, something like  noise_reducing_surface=yes

On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 5:12 PM Florian Lohoff <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 07:55:40PM +0000, [hidden email] wrote:
> Hello
>
> I used to live in Fribourg, Switzerland where they put "whispering
> asphalt" on one of the main roads in order to prevent noise. You can
> barely hear an EV now, but that is another story.
>
> Since we have quite a lot of discussions about noise pollution I
> thought it might be a good idea to implement a tag for that.
>
> surface=whispering_asphalt or surface=silent_asphalt came to my mind
> but I don't know what the official term for that aspahlt in English
> is. In German we call it "Flüsterbelag" or "Flüsterasphalt".
>
> Then I found on Overpass-Turbo someone that tagged
> "asphalt:type=porous". [1] Since I don't work in that area I don't
> know for sure if this is the same thing as I imagine and I found only
> one Wikipedia article in German [2] about that asphalt I mean.
>
> I personally prefer one of my first ideas, since I hate to add another
> key/value if I can say it in one.
>
> I look forward to hear your thoughts and comments.

The point is that when you invent a new value for surface a lot of
consumers will assume it to be some kind of bad/worse surface and
reduce the average speed to expect.

I'd rather propose surface=asphalt asphalt=whisper or the like.

asphalt:type would also be okay with me. There are more likely 100s of types
of asphalt.

Flo
--
Florian Lohoff                                                 [hidden email]
        UTF-8 Test: The 🐈 ran after a 🐁, but the 🐁 ran away
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Whispering asphalt

Paul Allen
On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 22:24, Yuri Astrakhan <[hidden email]> wrote:
or it could have solar panels integrated into it

Yes, roads with integrated solar panels have been proposed.  Any rational engineering
analysis comes to the conclusion that this is a very, very stupid idea for many reasons.
Nevertheless, there have been some trials.  All have done worse than the analyses.
They have been thoroughly debunked.  The surface isn't durable.  The panels are
very expensive in labour costs to replace when they break.  They don't give enough
traction.  A horizontal surface means sub-optimal efficiency, getting worse the further
you get from the equator.  Traffic on the roads shields the panels from the sun.

So there are a few trials scattered around the world.  There's little chance they'll become
widespread without several major technological breakthroughs because it's far cheaper
and more efficient to put panels over a road than embed them within it.

You raised some good points about surface features (which may not be limited to just
asphalt) but solar panels is unlikely to be one of them.  And if they're solar panels that
have embedded leds for smart road-surface signage and embedded heating elements
for melting snow, they are a complete scam.  So we'll never have to invent a tag
for "Solar Freakin' Roadways" (that's what they call themselves).

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Whispering asphalt

Tobias Wrede
In reply to this post by Yuri Astrakhan-2
Am 02.05.2019 um 23:23 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan:

> I don't think we should do asphalt classification -- too difficult for
> many cases, and very little value, especially in this case because it
> is not the "type" of asphalt, it is rather a "feature" of asphalt.
> Multiple features could exist in the same asphalt - e.g. it could have
> noise-canceling qualities, or it could have under-surface charging, or
> it could have solar panels integrated into it, or it could have high
> melting point so it works well under sun.
>
> In other words, I think it should be a yes flag, something like 
> noise_reducing_surface=yes

I would question to use any qualification at all. Whatever is now called
a quiet/whispering/noise reducing asphalt will have become a standard in
a couple of years and then a new type even more noise reducing will have
been invented. Will we then have
noise_reducing_surface=no|little|yes|yes_yes|definitely_yes?

If someone cannot resist I would second Yuri's suggestion.

Tobias


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Whispering asphalt

Paul Allen
On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 22:43, Tobias Wrede <[hidden email]> wrote:
I would question to use any qualification at all. Whatever is now called
a quiet/whispering/noise reducing asphalt will have become a standard in
a couple of years and then a new type even more noise reducing will have
been invented. Will we then have
noise_reducing_surface=no|little|yes|yes_yes|definitely_yes?

If we need this tag (I have my doubts) then the only sane way of handling that would be
something like noise_reduction_db=* where the figure is relative to a "normal" surface
(e.g., smooth concrete) measured at some specified distance.  I'll leave it to the
specialists to come up with those conditions.

I really doubt we need it.  People are unlikely to choose a minimum-noise route even if
their satnav offered the option, not if it means the journey is longer or slower.  People
living nearby who are actually affected by road noise will know whether they have a loud
road or a quiet one without our help.  We won't be able to tell if the tag applies from
satellite imagery.  It will be hard to verify unless a community proudly puts up signs
announcing they've spent money on such a surface.  OTOH, people tag things like
this just because they can, so we'll probably have to come up with something sane here
before people make tags up at random.

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Whispering asphalt

Yuri Astrakhan-2
Well, one use case would be for property shoppers to find an area with the quieter asphalt.  But yes, all this is a bit far fetched.

On the other hand, I do not want to restrict people from mapping whatever interesting information they know, as long as that information is in standardized-ish format that is easy to consume, and does not break existing consumers

On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 5:53 PM Paul Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 22:43, Tobias Wrede <[hidden email]> wrote:
I would question to use any qualification at all. Whatever is now called
a quiet/whispering/noise reducing asphalt will have become a standard in
a couple of years and then a new type even more noise reducing will have
been invented. Will we then have
noise_reducing_surface=no|little|yes|yes_yes|definitely_yes?

If we need this tag (I have my doubts) then the only sane way of handling that would be
something like noise_reduction_db=* where the figure is relative to a "normal" surface
(e.g., smooth concrete) measured at some specified distance.  I'll leave it to the
specialists to come up with those conditions.

I really doubt we need it.  People are unlikely to choose a minimum-noise route even if
their satnav offered the option, not if it means the journey is longer or slower.  People
living nearby who are actually affected by road noise will know whether they have a loud
road or a quiet one without our help.  We won't be able to tell if the tag applies from
satellite imagery.  It will be hard to verify unless a community proudly puts up signs
announcing they've spent money on such a surface.  OTOH, people tag things like
this just because they can, so we'll probably have to come up with something sane here
before people make tags up at random.

--
Paul

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Whispering asphalt

Peter Elderson
In reply to this post by Paul Allen
Whenever the quali ...-reducing is used, I know the stuff or thing actually produces ... where ... is bad. 

Mvg Peter Elderson

Op 2 mei 2019 om 23:52 heeft Paul Allen <[hidden email]> het volgende geschreven:

On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 22:43, Tobias Wrede <[hidden email]> wrote:
I would question to use any qualification at all. Whatever is now called
a quiet/whispering/noise reducing asphalt will have become a standard in
a couple of years and then a new type even more noise reducing will have
been invented. Will we then have
noise_reducing_surface=no|little|yes|yes_yes|definitely_yes?

If we need this tag (I have my doubts) then the only sane way of handling that would be
something like noise_reduction_db=* where the figure is relative to a "normal" surface
(e.g., smooth concrete) measured at some specified distance.  I'll leave it to the
specialists to come up with those conditions.

I really doubt we need it.  People are unlikely to choose a minimum-noise route even if
their satnav offered the option, not if it means the journey is longer or slower.  People
living nearby who are actually affected by road noise will know whether they have a loud
road or a quiet one without our help.  We won't be able to tell if the tag applies from
satellite imagery.  It will be hard to verify unless a community proudly puts up signs
announcing they've spent money on such a surface.  OTOH, people tag things like
this just because they can, so we'll probably have to come up with something sane here
before people make tags up at random.

--
Paul

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Whispering asphalt

Graeme Fitzpatrick
In reply to this post by Paul Allen

On Fri, 3 May 2019 at 07:53, Paul Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:
If we need this tag (I have my doubts) then the only sane way of handling that would be
something like noise_reduction_db=* where the figure is relative to a "normal" surface
(e.g., smooth concrete) measured at some specified distance.

& because concrete is "noisier" than asphalt to drive on, do we then turn this round & say that "this" stretch of road is noise_increase_db=* ? :-)

Thanks

Graeme

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Whispering asphalt

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Florian Lohoff-2


sent from a phone

> On 2. May 2019, at 23:11, Florian Lohoff <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I'd rather propose surface=asphalt asphalt=whisper or the like.
>
> asphalt:type would also be okay with me. There are more likely 100s of types
> of asphalt.


I also would not introduce a new surface value, it is still asphalt. Either you see it as an additional property like
asphalt:noise=low (thinking of eventually 2-3 values like low/default/noisy), which would open a whole field of asphalt properties (asphalt:drainage, ...) or if „whispering asphalt“ is really considered a type of asphalt on its own, a subtag for an asphalt class:
asphalt=whispering or porous...
(or the synonymous asphalt:type asphalt_type,...)

I would tend to the former
asphalt:noise=low

(concise and easy to understand)

Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Whispering asphalt

Peter Elderson
I would not map a noise level value for any surface. a. It's not the surface that produces the noise; b. it's a relative value, but compared to what? You would need/assume  a standard regular noise value for comparison; c. the standard will change over time, making all mapped values wrong.

<Duck mode> I'm at an asphalt road. The asphalt looks fine to me, nice and smooth. There is no label attached to the surface. What would the noise level be? Mmmmmm.... can't tell. Don't have a noisometer. Next! </>

Vr gr Peter Elderson


Op vr 3 mei 2019 om 10:14 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer <[hidden email]>:


sent from a phone

> On 2. May 2019, at 23:11, Florian Lohoff <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I'd rather propose surface=asphalt asphalt=whisper or the like.
>
> asphalt:type would also be okay with me. There are more likely 100s of types
> of asphalt.


I also would not introduce a new surface value, it is still asphalt. Either you see it as an additional property like
asphalt:noise=low (thinking of eventually 2-3 values like low/default/noisy), which would open a whole field of asphalt properties (asphalt:drainage, ...) or if „whispering asphalt“ is really considered a type of asphalt on its own, a subtag for an asphalt class:
asphalt=whispering or porous...
(or the synonymous asphalt:type asphalt_type,...)

I would tend to the former
asphalt:noise=low

(concise and easy to understand)

Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Whispering asphalt

Mateusz Konieczny-3
In reply to this post by amilopowers



2 May 2019, 21:55 by [hidden email]:
surface=whispering_asphalt or surface=silent_asphalt
Please avoid fragmenting surface tag.
Then I found on Overpass-Turbo someone that tagged "asphalt:type=porous".
Something like that would be preferable if it is mappable.

In general, introducing new values for established tags to tag some
property should be avoided.

For example I believe that

natural=tree + leaf_cycle=evergreen
or
shop=greengrocer+ street_vendor=yes [1]

is preferable over

natural=evergreen_tree
or
shop=greengrocer_street_vendor [1]

Using properties allows both to tag detail and to avoid breaking data users
that were created before more detailed tagging started.

[1] I assume here that street vendor is mappable -
appearing regularly at the same place for a long time

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Whispering asphalt

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Peter Elderson


Am Fr., 3. Mai 2019 um 10:44 Uhr schrieb Peter Elderson <[hidden email]>:
I would not map a noise level value for any surface. a. It's not the surface that produces the noise; b. it's a relative value, but compared to what? You would need/assume  a standard regular noise value for comparison; c. the standard will change over time, making all mapped values wrong.


it really depends how you understand the meaning of the tag. If you would map a "noise level" you would need normalized conditions to measure, but if you just want to say "creates more / less noise than a normal asphalt road around here" it could be possible. Yes, it might change what is considered "normal". FWIW, when I rode on such asphalt I did notice a difference. And so far they also tend to put signs there to make you aware of the "novelty" (would obviously also change if it becomes the norm).
 
Cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Whispering asphalt

bkil
In reply to this post by Mateusz Konieczny-3
Thank you for bringing street_vendor=* to my attention. I've been looking for something like this for some time now.

On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 11:33 AM Mateusz Konieczny <[hidden email]> wrote:



2 May 2019, 21:55 by [hidden email]:
surface=whispering_asphalt or surface=silent_asphalt
Please avoid fragmenting surface tag.
Then I found on Overpass-Turbo someone that tagged "asphalt:type=porous".
Something like that would be preferable if it is mappable.

In general, introducing new values for established tags to tag some
property should be avoided.

For example I believe that

natural=tree + leaf_cycle=evergreen
or
shop=greengrocer+ street_vendor=yes [1]

is preferable over

natural=evergreen_tree
or
shop=greengrocer_street_vendor [1]

Using properties allows both to tag detail and to avoid breaking data users
that were created before more detailed tagging started.

[1] I assume here that street vendor is mappable -
appearing regularly at the same place for a long time
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging