Desiging tips
Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2010 2:06 pm
Just some tips... others will have other and maybe better tips
1. Download the Excel or Openoffice editor. See here: viewtopic.php?f=38&t=178
2. How it works... fairly easy to understand, no need to explain..One thing though. If you work with altitude and not percentages the following problem can occur.
50-45-40-35-30: If you give those numbers in, you will get -1 -1 -1 -1 in the percentage column. And that what will finally appear in the race. You lose 40 meters when you should only lose 20. So you have to adjust it yourself. One solution is what I do. I just work with 10. If the start is at 7, I put in 10, goes up to 15, put in 20. Then ok, use the brain as well, if the altitude is 4 5 4 5 4 5 making it 1 -1 1 -1 etc is idiotic... Or you can put in the real height always, but pay attention that cases like the example above don't happen... if you have something like there put in 50 46 40 36 30 or so. And to check that in the end the altitude is correct you can copy the percentage column from the "altitude inputsheet" to the "percentage input sheet" Then there you will see if the altitude is correct.
3 I recommend saving your file, not only as a etn file, but also as a normal excel/open office file on your computer. Especially if it's a real race. Will be much easier to correct possible mistakes later, if it's a one day race and the parcours changes slightly you still can use the profile from the year before as a base, makes it much easier.
4 Click on the big button that says "save the race" It then saves it as an etn file.You'll see where it's saved on top on the right somewhere.
5 Go to the online editor, see the first link, rest should be easy. Don't forget to check with preview to see if the profile looks ok.
Designing itself:
Use all the available resources. Some races have excellent data, the RCS races for example, very good altitude profiles that in my experience are more precise than the other online resources. But don't fully rely on that either, use the other things as well.
General resources
http://www.tracks4bikers.com/ Good, fast and easy to use. 2 sets of data. 1 GMAP. Advantage, it has more roads, disadvantage, it's less precise. 2. OSM, less roads, but more precise. REad somewhere (don't remember where) that OSM has the srtm data integrated. Ah, srtm is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuttle_Ra ... hy_Mission or read here, this guys site is fun anyway... http://www.viewfinderpanoramas.org/ Back to tracks4bikers: It works well enough in Europe. the USA. But in my experience not in most other places. The roads too often 500 meters or 1 km or so away from where they really are. And then of course in mountains or hills it becomes useless. Other problem, this one in Europe too: Pay attention to what route it chooses. Sometimes it does some extralaps for nothing, sometimes it takes shortcuts (a nice one on the cipressa for example). So always check if the road it takes is really the one it should take. Then cut the route in 25-30 Km pieces, then it's easier to read the data than if you make a 200 Km thing and then spend ages looking for every km. I think it's perfect for early flat parts of a race, much less for mountains. Did a test with the Stelvio from Bormio, it gave me one km at 11% both for GMAP and OSM (so maybe OSM after all is not more precise, maybe misread..) which doesn't exist on any of the climb databases.
google earth: Download it and test yourself. As far as I know it has the same data as google maps, so the same data as tracks4bikers using GMAP. The advantage is: tracks4bikers only takes the altitude every 300 meters. With google earth you get it whenever you want. Then by tilting the view you can see obvious mistakes, the river that is not on the bottom of the valley but 30 higher up somehow etc. Of course track4bikers etc has the same mistakes, but there it's more difficult to catch them. The big disadvantage of course is that it takes ages to do it.
http://www.bikeroutetoaster.com/ Another thing like tracks4bikers, but much worse to use. Almost unusable by itself. But.... one advantage.
http://www.gps-freeware.de/Beschreibung.aspx All in german... but it's good. GPS Track Analyse 2 ways to use it:
1: Use bikeroutetoaster to make a route. then Save it as a GPX file. Open the GPX Track analyse thing, open your GPX file. (Datei-öffnen) Then add the srtm files (Höhenwerte-SRTM-Höhendaten zuweisen). You won't have the file on your computer, so you have to download it. Important step, because otherwise you will just have the normal bikeroutetoaster data, which is less precise than srtm. And then the whole exercise with the GPS Track analyse becomes worthless. AFter clicking on SRTM zuweisen, it will tell you which srtm files you need for this route, and there are links to where you can download them too. Download them. Done.(well, click SRTM Daten zuweisen...) Then all you need to do is to put in the thing in the excel/open office file. A good help is: Extras-Optionen then click on 2D Höhenmodell mit vertikalen Längenlinien, so to see the km on the profile on top. Took me ages to figure that out, wasn't the default setting, grrr, was a real hassle doing it without it.... Then if you have the whole course, cut it into 25-30 Km long pieces Mark km 25 for example (I usually do 25...) then track-Trennen bei markierung. And you'll have a 25 km thing that will be easy to read and copy (by hand..) into the excel file. Theoretically this works as well if you download it from tracks4bikers, but each time I did that the track then got shorter when I opened it in the GTA
2: Open google earth, make a track. Save the track as kml file after it's done. Then open it with the GTA. There is one problem for non germans though, to make that method work you have to change a setting somewhere... forgot where and what, swiss and austrians etc can probably find out on their own in the forumlink given in the link up here, that's where I found it when it didn't work, french, english or whatever, if somebody wants to try I'll go and look... Disadvantage, takes time to make those damn tracks, especially if you have a jumping mouse like mine...Advantage, you can have more trackpoints than if you do it with the toaster, so you can really get the exact km, with bikeroutetoaster sometimes the closes trackpoint was still 200 or more meters away, by doing it with google earth you can have it almost to the meter, if you want, really depends how much you zoom in... My test with the Stelvio from bormio, looks better than the track4bikers test, no 11% km. Max 9%
Mountains:
Databases with climbs:
http://www.altimetrias.net/default.asp Mostly spanish climbs, the problem is that sometimes the names are not the same... the Vuelta calls it Collado de Roby, the Volta a Catalunya calls it Puerto del Simio and altimetrias calls it Cima Klebt... sometimes. But for me maybe the best of the databases, not too many climbs though.
http://www.cyclingcols.com/ Good too, although you need good eyes. LCBs favorite site, the percentages are given in steps of 0,5%. Altitude to the meter, but hard to read. That's why when both have it I use altimetrias.
http://www.salite.ch/struttura/default.asp?Ultime=10 has most climbs, but the least reliable. while Altimetrias and Cyclingcols are from guys that ride the climbs themselves (As far as I understood) salite just has it, not sure how or why...my test the Stelvio from Bormio looks almost the same in all 3 places, altimetrias starts from a bit further down, and has steeper sections than the 2 others, slightly steeper. But sometimes the differences are bigger, and when in doubt, go with cyclingcols or altimetrias. Double and triple checking with altimetrias, cyclingcols, google earth and GTA shows that salite.ch is not really reliable. It's the oldest of the sites as well I think, they probably started with barometric readings..But of course it's still fairly good.
For mountains I recommend using those profiles, tracks4bikers can really only give a general idea, GTA better, but srtm isn't perfect either, especially in mountain areas with narrow valleys etc. Of course if you can't find the climb in one of the 3 places (or others) then go for t4b or GTA or google earth. GTA the best I think, but then depends how important it is... Finaly climb of a real race... rather do it with GTA. Early climb in a fantasy race? t4b is enough.
That's it for the moment, hope other designers will add their own tips!
1. Download the Excel or Openoffice editor. See here: viewtopic.php?f=38&t=178
2. How it works... fairly easy to understand, no need to explain..One thing though. If you work with altitude and not percentages the following problem can occur.
50-45-40-35-30: If you give those numbers in, you will get -1 -1 -1 -1 in the percentage column. And that what will finally appear in the race. You lose 40 meters when you should only lose 20. So you have to adjust it yourself. One solution is what I do. I just work with 10. If the start is at 7, I put in 10, goes up to 15, put in 20. Then ok, use the brain as well, if the altitude is 4 5 4 5 4 5 making it 1 -1 1 -1 etc is idiotic... Or you can put in the real height always, but pay attention that cases like the example above don't happen... if you have something like there put in 50 46 40 36 30 or so. And to check that in the end the altitude is correct you can copy the percentage column from the "altitude inputsheet" to the "percentage input sheet" Then there you will see if the altitude is correct.
3 I recommend saving your file, not only as a etn file, but also as a normal excel/open office file on your computer. Especially if it's a real race. Will be much easier to correct possible mistakes later, if it's a one day race and the parcours changes slightly you still can use the profile from the year before as a base, makes it much easier.
4 Click on the big button that says "save the race" It then saves it as an etn file.You'll see where it's saved on top on the right somewhere.
5 Go to the online editor, see the first link, rest should be easy. Don't forget to check with preview to see if the profile looks ok.
Designing itself:
Use all the available resources. Some races have excellent data, the RCS races for example, very good altitude profiles that in my experience are more precise than the other online resources. But don't fully rely on that either, use the other things as well.
General resources
http://www.tracks4bikers.com/ Good, fast and easy to use. 2 sets of data. 1 GMAP. Advantage, it has more roads, disadvantage, it's less precise. 2. OSM, less roads, but more precise. REad somewhere (don't remember where) that OSM has the srtm data integrated. Ah, srtm is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuttle_Ra ... hy_Mission or read here, this guys site is fun anyway... http://www.viewfinderpanoramas.org/ Back to tracks4bikers: It works well enough in Europe. the USA. But in my experience not in most other places. The roads too often 500 meters or 1 km or so away from where they really are. And then of course in mountains or hills it becomes useless. Other problem, this one in Europe too: Pay attention to what route it chooses. Sometimes it does some extralaps for nothing, sometimes it takes shortcuts (a nice one on the cipressa for example). So always check if the road it takes is really the one it should take. Then cut the route in 25-30 Km pieces, then it's easier to read the data than if you make a 200 Km thing and then spend ages looking for every km. I think it's perfect for early flat parts of a race, much less for mountains. Did a test with the Stelvio from Bormio, it gave me one km at 11% both for GMAP and OSM (so maybe OSM after all is not more precise, maybe misread..) which doesn't exist on any of the climb databases.
google earth: Download it and test yourself. As far as I know it has the same data as google maps, so the same data as tracks4bikers using GMAP. The advantage is: tracks4bikers only takes the altitude every 300 meters. With google earth you get it whenever you want. Then by tilting the view you can see obvious mistakes, the river that is not on the bottom of the valley but 30 higher up somehow etc. Of course track4bikers etc has the same mistakes, but there it's more difficult to catch them. The big disadvantage of course is that it takes ages to do it.
http://www.bikeroutetoaster.com/ Another thing like tracks4bikers, but much worse to use. Almost unusable by itself. But.... one advantage.
http://www.gps-freeware.de/Beschreibung.aspx All in german... but it's good. GPS Track Analyse 2 ways to use it:
1: Use bikeroutetoaster to make a route. then Save it as a GPX file. Open the GPX Track analyse thing, open your GPX file. (Datei-öffnen) Then add the srtm files (Höhenwerte-SRTM-Höhendaten zuweisen). You won't have the file on your computer, so you have to download it. Important step, because otherwise you will just have the normal bikeroutetoaster data, which is less precise than srtm. And then the whole exercise with the GPS Track analyse becomes worthless. AFter clicking on SRTM zuweisen, it will tell you which srtm files you need for this route, and there are links to where you can download them too. Download them. Done.(well, click SRTM Daten zuweisen...) Then all you need to do is to put in the thing in the excel/open office file. A good help is: Extras-Optionen then click on 2D Höhenmodell mit vertikalen Längenlinien, so to see the km on the profile on top. Took me ages to figure that out, wasn't the default setting, grrr, was a real hassle doing it without it.... Then if you have the whole course, cut it into 25-30 Km long pieces Mark km 25 for example (I usually do 25...) then track-Trennen bei markierung. And you'll have a 25 km thing that will be easy to read and copy (by hand..) into the excel file. Theoretically this works as well if you download it from tracks4bikers, but each time I did that the track then got shorter when I opened it in the GTA
2: Open google earth, make a track. Save the track as kml file after it's done. Then open it with the GTA. There is one problem for non germans though, to make that method work you have to change a setting somewhere... forgot where and what, swiss and austrians etc can probably find out on their own in the forumlink given in the link up here, that's where I found it when it didn't work, french, english or whatever, if somebody wants to try I'll go and look... Disadvantage, takes time to make those damn tracks, especially if you have a jumping mouse like mine...Advantage, you can have more trackpoints than if you do it with the toaster, so you can really get the exact km, with bikeroutetoaster sometimes the closes trackpoint was still 200 or more meters away, by doing it with google earth you can have it almost to the meter, if you want, really depends how much you zoom in... My test with the Stelvio from bormio, looks better than the track4bikers test, no 11% km. Max 9%
Mountains:
Databases with climbs:
http://www.altimetrias.net/default.asp Mostly spanish climbs, the problem is that sometimes the names are not the same... the Vuelta calls it Collado de Roby, the Volta a Catalunya calls it Puerto del Simio and altimetrias calls it Cima Klebt... sometimes. But for me maybe the best of the databases, not too many climbs though.
http://www.cyclingcols.com/ Good too, although you need good eyes. LCBs favorite site, the percentages are given in steps of 0,5%. Altitude to the meter, but hard to read. That's why when both have it I use altimetrias.
http://www.salite.ch/struttura/default.asp?Ultime=10 has most climbs, but the least reliable. while Altimetrias and Cyclingcols are from guys that ride the climbs themselves (As far as I understood) salite just has it, not sure how or why...my test the Stelvio from Bormio looks almost the same in all 3 places, altimetrias starts from a bit further down, and has steeper sections than the 2 others, slightly steeper. But sometimes the differences are bigger, and when in doubt, go with cyclingcols or altimetrias. Double and triple checking with altimetrias, cyclingcols, google earth and GTA shows that salite.ch is not really reliable. It's the oldest of the sites as well I think, they probably started with barometric readings..But of course it's still fairly good.
For mountains I recommend using those profiles, tracks4bikers can really only give a general idea, GTA better, but srtm isn't perfect either, especially in mountain areas with narrow valleys etc. Of course if you can't find the climb in one of the 3 places (or others) then go for t4b or GTA or google earth. GTA the best I think, but then depends how important it is... Finaly climb of a real race... rather do it with GTA. Early climb in a fantasy race? t4b is enough.
That's it for the moment, hope other designers will add their own tips!