Design the new solutions to be considered (5:30 min)

00:01

PRESENTER: Hi there.

00:03

In this video, we will explore potential solutions

00:05

to be considered for our roads and highways project.

00:10

This is where we are on the overall view

00:13

of the Analysis in Civil Engineering learning path.

00:17

Ideally, when starting to design different proposals

00:20

or solutions, we would base them on an original proposal that

00:24

already has all the data that we will

00:26

be comparing later on, such as the TSAs, or Traffic Study

00:31

Areas.

00:32

So [INAUDIBLE] traffic simulations and its TSAs

00:36

works between proposals.

00:38

At this point, you have most probably

00:40

noticed that you can not rename proposals,

00:44

but you can easily clone new ones

00:45

and delete the previous, if you have such a need.

00:48

Also, as you probably have already realized,

00:51

the TSAs are copied from one proposal

00:53

to the next one added, which is therefore

00:55

a clone with a different name that

00:57

includes the original proposals TSEs, if any.

01:03

Despite how a design may change, the demands

01:05

shouldn't, so we do want that information

01:08

to be transferred in order to avoid

01:10

typing it over and over again.

01:12

However, it is not possible to transfer TSAs directly

01:16

between existing proposals.

01:17

Is there any solution?

01:19

It is.

01:19

If it's too late, because you have

01:21

work done on different proposals,

01:23

you can try to merge them.

01:24

The action would transfer the TSAs plus all the data too.

01:28

However, you must be aware that this action could easily

01:31

lead into a corruption.

01:34

In example, PX01 has been created

01:37

based on a proposal that doesn't have TSAs.

01:40

And then, on the other hand, PY01

01:43

has been cloned from a proposal that has TSAs.

01:46

When merging PY01 into PX01, the TSAs will be displayed on PX01.

01:56

As we saw, the original P01 network proposal

01:59

shouldn't guarantee a decent traffic functionality,

02:02

and therefore, the roundabout alternative

02:04

was proposed, which made the solution fully functional.

02:09

That was an example of data driven design.

02:12

However, urban spatial planning is not only

02:15

having [INAUDIBLE] traffic, although, it

02:18

is an important factor.

02:20

Spatial planning is defined as the set of methods

02:23

able to influence and coordinate practices and policies

02:26

affecting the distribution of people and activities

02:29

in spaces most commonly within the cities.

02:33

Despite that the roundabout solution is a clear improvement

02:37

to the current arrangement, local authorities

02:39

are increasingly prioritizing and reviewing

02:42

environmental data, as well--

02:44

data, such as noise, pollution, wildlife, impact, et cetera.

02:49

In our case, after long consideration and a budget

02:52

boost, the authorities decided to give more importance

02:56

to green factors and consider a sustainable

02:59

proposal able to address both practical and environmental

03:03

requirements.

03:09

Here, the second design to consider.

03:13

This proposal adds a bridge that allows

03:16

to get rid of the busiest intersection,

03:19

and therefore, reduce both the noise and the pollution.

03:23

As the traffic simulation shows, this proposal

03:26

is also functional.

03:28

In order to add a bridge, a component road

03:31

required in first instance.

03:33

After that, the quantities of the bridge

03:36

can be easily checked using the structure's table.

03:39

The next proposal is the P03 one.

03:43

In this one, we have tried to meet all the local authorities

03:47

criteria and propose something that breaks

03:51

with the previous options.

03:53

I have switched the view to a conceptual one

03:56

so that you can feel the difference between the two.

04:00

The west roundabout is still there.

04:04

As it happened with the previous proposal,

04:06

this one has no freeways intersection.

04:10

And on top of that, one of the freeways

04:13

has been buried using a tunnel.

04:18

As you see, on the back, there is no railway

04:24

on the surface neither.

04:27

This space has been used to deploy a natural park

04:30

able to be used by wildlife.

04:37

Here are the railways, also buried, a little bit

04:42

above the freeway tunnel.

04:53

The P03 option, although it's altering

04:57

more of the surroundings, is clearly based on the P02 one.

05:01

And despite being much more expensive,

05:04

it meets all requirements for functionality

05:07

and sustainability asked by the local bureau.

05:12

Finally, we can run a traffic simulation

05:14

to verify that it is also functional.

05:17

But as you can imagine, it doesn't differ too much

05:21

from the P02 proposal.