UK and Europe · Public discussion

Grooved tiles on cycle paths

Started by Dave Kahn · · Last activity · 62 posts · 2,162 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
UK and Europe
Published
5 November 2004
Last activity
8 November 2004
Original author
Dave Kahn
Posts
62
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
2,162
Views / 30 days
0
Topics

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 62
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. I'm not sure if this is the correct name for them but many of the
    cycle paths I encounter have these things laid into them, particularly
    on segregated cycle/pedestrian ones. The tiles are laid with the
    grooves parallel to the path on the cycle side, and at 90 degress on
    the pedestrian one. The path designers obviously think this will
    encourage cyclists to stick to their own side.

    However, running over the tiles in line with the grooves is decidedly
    unpleasant. When your tyre is on a ridge it tends to thud down into a
    groove. When it's in a groove, the groove tends to [censored] the wheel.
    One path I have been using has a line of these tiles every 25 metres
    or so. Assuming it is pedestrian free I move over to the wrong side
    just long enough to negotiate the tiles. Because the grooves are at 90
    degrees to the path and close together the tyre cannot fall into them.
    There's just a gentle thrumming vibration as you pass over them.

    Either these things have not been researched or they've all been laid
    the wrong way. Or possibly I'm insane; it sometimes seems as though
    I'm the only one marching in step.

    --
    Dave...

    P.S. I also hate those knobbly tiles you get at pedestrian crossings.
    They play havoc with in-line skates.

  2. Dave Kahn said:

    Either these things have not been researched or they've all been laid
    the wrong way. Or possibly I'm insane; it sometimes seems as though
    I'm the only one marching in step.

    These are Corduroy tiles and they are there to aid the visually impaired.
    Corduroy tiles are meant to warn of danger and the change of orientation
    is important. There are guidelines on how they should be laid:

    http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_mobility/documents/page/dft_mobility_503283-07.hcsp

    Colin

  3. Colin Blackburn said:

    These are Corduroy tiles and they are there to aid the visually
    impaired. Corduroy tiles are meant to warn of danger and the change of
    orientation is important. There are guidelines on how they should be
    laid:

    http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_mobility/documents/page/dft_mobility_503283-07.hcsp

    Sorry, Chapter 5 is the specific one on shared use facilities:

    http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_mobility/documents/page/dft_mobility_503283-10.hcsp

    Colin

  4. Dave Kahn vaguely muttered something like ...

    Quoted message said:

    Either these things have not been researched or they've all been laid
    the wrong way. Or possibly I'm insane; it sometimes seems as though
    I'm the only one marching in step.

    I think they are to denote a possible source of danger, or something
    similar, to partially sighted people who also use the path. Their
    orientation is critical to this purpose.

    Your inconvenience is relatively minor.

    --
    Paul ...
    (8(|) Homer Rules !!!
    "A [censored] is a [censored], no matter what mode of transport they're using."

  5. Dave Kahn said:

    I'm not sure if this is the correct name for them but many of the
    cycle paths I encounter have these things laid into them,


    particularly

    Quoted message said:

    on segregated cycle/pedestrian ones. The tiles are laid with the
    grooves parallel to the path on the cycle side, and at 90 degress on
    the pedestrian one. The path designers obviously think this will
    encourage cyclists to stick to their own side.

    However, running over the tiles in line with the grooves is decidedly
    unpleasant. When your tyre is on a ridge it tends to thud down into a
    groove. When it's in a groove, the groove tends to [censored] the wheel.

    there are two types. One is intended for the use you identify
    <url:
    http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_mobility/documents/graphic/dft_mobility_503283-28.jpg

    Quoted message said:

    The other type has much taller round topped ridges

    <url:
    http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_mobility/documents/graphic/dft_mobility_503283-19.jpg

    Quoted message said:


    "The corduroy surface can be used for any situation (except at
    pedestrian crossing points - see Chapter 1) where visually impaired
    people need to be warned of a hazard and advised to proceed with
    caution"

    It is not uncommon for councils to mix them up though. Talk to the
    authority responsible for the path about correcting it if they have
    used the wrong type

    All of the above links and refs come from here <url:
    http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_mobility/documents/page/dft_mobility_503283.hcsp

    Quoted message said:


    which explains it all in more detail

    best wishes
    james

  6. And when they're wet they become quite astonishingly slippy. I've fallen off on the wretched things a couple of times. I now tend to ride over on the pedestrian side 'cos it's safer

  7. "Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]>typed

    Quoted message said:

    Dave Kahn vaguely muttered something like ...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Either these things have not been researched or they've all been laid
    the wrong way. Or possibly I'm insane; it sometimes seems as though
    I'm the only one marching in step.

    Quoted message said:

    I think they are to denote a possible source of danger, or something
    similar, to partially sighted people who also use the path. Their
    orientation is critical to this purpose.

    Quoted message said:

    Your inconvenience is relatively minor.

    Not at all! These grooves, in some weather conditions, could cause a
    cyclist to fall off. This is NOT a '*minor inconvenience*'!

    --
    Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
    Edgware.

  8. Seamus <[email hidden]>typed

    Quoted message said:

    And when they're wet they become quite astonishingly slippy. I've fallen
    off on the wretched things a couple of times. I now tend to ride over on
    the pedestrian side 'cos it's safer

    QED!

    --
    Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
    Edgware.

  9. Helen Deborah Vecht vaguely muttered something like ...

    Quoted message said:

    "Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]>typed

    Quoted message said:

    Dave Kahn vaguely muttered something like ...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Either these things have not been researched or they've all been laid
    the wrong way. Or possibly I'm insane; it sometimes seems as though
    I'm the only one marching in step.

    Quoted message said:

    I think they are to denote a possible source of danger, or something
    similar, to partially sighted people who also use the path. Their
    orientation is critical to this purpose.

    Quoted message said:

    Your inconvenience is relatively minor.

    Not at all! These grooves, in some weather conditions, could cause a
    cyclist to fall off. This is NOT a '*minor inconvenience*'!

    Your inconvenience is relatively minor ... compared to the help the tiles
    give those they are aimed at.

    As they appear to be on a shared use path, maybe cyclists shouldn't be going
    so fast as to be worried by small bits of the path (the tiles) that are a
    bit slippy. And yes, I _do_ know what the tiles are, and yes, I do ride
    over them, but no, I've never actually ever felt that they were likely to
    cause me any inconvenience.

    --
    Paul ...
    (8(|) Homer Rules !!!
    "A [censored] is a [censored], no matter what mode of transport they're using."

  10. (Dave Kahn) said:

    Either these things have not been researched

    Ooh, I wonder if that could be it !

    They even _call_ the things "tramlines". And then they wonder why
    cyclists go round them "in reverse" if it's wet.

  11. "Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]>typed

    Quoted message said:

    Helen Deborah Vecht vaguely muttered something like ...

    Quoted message said:

    "Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]>typed

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Your inconvenience is relatively minor.

    Not at all! These grooves, in some weather conditions, could cause a
    cyclist to fall off. This is NOT a '*minor inconvenience*'!

    Quoted message said:

    Your inconvenience is relatively minor ... compared to the help the tiles
    give those they are aimed at.

    Given that I'm a wobbly pedestrian, unable to ride a bicycle and unable
    to dodge cyclists straying onto the 'wrong' side of shared use
    farcilities, I'm sure you're right (not)

    Tactile paving surfaces (knobbly or grooved) *do* give me difficulties,
    but as a sighted person who doesn't (yet) need a wheelchair I don't
    count!

    --
    Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
    Edgware.

  12. Helen Deborah Vecht said:

    Seamus <[email hidden]>typed

    Quoted message said:

    And when they're wet they become quite astonishingly slippy. I've fallen
    off on the wretched things a couple of times. I now tend to ride over on
    the pedestrian side 'cos it's safer

    QED!

    --
    Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
    Edgware.


    And if you think it's hard on a bike you should try on rollerblades. Crash city.

  13. Colin Blackburn said:
    Colin Blackburn said:

    These are Corduroy tiles and they are there to aid the visually
    impaired. Corduroy tiles are meant to warn of danger and the change of
    orientation is important. There are guidelines on how they should be
    laid:

    http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_mobility/documents/page/dft_mobility_503283-07.hcsp

    Sorry, Chapter 5 is the specific one on shared use facilities:

    http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_mobility/documents/page/dft_mobility_503283-10.hcsp

    Thanks for that, Colin. If they're principally an aid for the visually
    impaired I'm more ready to accept them. However, you're second link
    contains the information:

    Quoted message said:

    This arrangement was chosen because it was felt the rumble effect created
    by the transverse pattern would deter cyclists from entering on the pedestrian side.

    Completely wrong in practice as the rumble effect is not at all
    unpleasant, whereas the tram line effect is.

    --
    Dave...

    Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live. - Mark Twain

  14. email hidden said:

    All of the above links and refs come from here <url:
    http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_mobility/documents/page/dft_mobility_503283.hcsp

    Quoted message said:


    which explains it all in more detail

    Thanks for the information. On the path I mainly have in mind the
    central delineator strip has not been used, just a white line. This
    seems to defeat much of the purpose.

    --
    Dave...

    Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live. - Mark Twain

  15. Paul - censored said:

    As they appear to be on a shared use path, maybe cyclists shouldn't be going
    so fast as to be worried by small bits of the path (the tiles) that are a
    bit slippy. And yes, I _do_ know what the tiles are, and yes, I do ride
    over them, but no, I've never actually ever felt that they were likely to
    cause me any inconvenience.

    Maybe your tyres are wider than mine. I'm using 28mm Conti Gator Skins
    and the tiles on the cyclist side definitely [censored] at them, like a
    tram line but much less vicious. I'll continue to pass over them on
    the pedestrian side as long as I'm not inconveniencing any pedestrians
    in doing so. The pedestrians seem to be evenly distributed on both
    sides of the path anyway.

    --
    Dave...

    Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live. - Mark Twain

  16. Andy Dingley said:
    (Dave Kahn) said:

    Either these things have not been researched

    Ooh, I wonder if that could be it !

    They even _call_ the things "tramlines". And then they wonder why
    cyclists go round them "in reverse" if it's wet.

    Glad to knoow I'm not the only one.

    --
    Dave...

    Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live. - Mark Twain

  17. KakenBetaal said:


    Helen Deborah Vecht said:

    Seamus <[email hidden]>typed

    Quoted message said:

    And when they're wet they become quite astonishingly slippy. I've


    fallen

    Quoted message said:

    off on the wretched things a couple of times. I now tend to ride over


    on

    Quoted message said:

    the pedestrian side 'cos it's safer


    QED!

    Quoted message said:

    And if you think it's hard on a bike you should try on rollerblades.
    Crash city.

    The official position seems to be:

    Quoted message said:

    This arrangement was chosen because it was felt the rumble effect
    created by the transverse pattern would deter cyclists from entering
    on the pedestrian side."

    In line with my OP this suggests a "common sense" assumption made by
    non-cyclists rather than the most basic research.

    --
    Dave...

    Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live. - Mark Twain

  18. Dave Kahn wrote:

    [...]

    Quoted message said:

    Either these things have not been researched or they've all been laid
    the wrong way. Or possibly I'm insane; it sometimes seems as though
    I'm the only one marching in step.

    Nah, I tend to go over the rumble-strip rather than the tram-lines,
    too. The former is mildly uncomfortable, the latter decidedly dangerous.

    I see from the rest of the thread that it's another triumph of common
    "sense" over practical knowldge. Marvellous. Still, it's nice to know
    for definite - I might shoot off a letter to the Proper Authorities.

    --
    Keith Willoughby http://flat222.org/keith/
    "And we were singing hymns and arias"

  19. KakenBetaal said:

    And if you think it's hard on a bike you should try on rollerblades.
    Crash city.

    The cycle side (groove in direction of travel) is manageable if you
    stop stroking and 'coast' over it - assuming it's short enough that
    you still have some momentum left at the end, anyway.

    The ped side is a great way to slow down really quickly but if you're
    expecting it is possible to get across without stacking. Bend your
    legs more, scissor, shift your weight towards the back of the boot.
    If you're not expecting it, it's a great way to stop really quickly
    _and_ lie down suddenly.

    http://www.londonskaters.com/how-to-skate-on-rough-ground.htm

    though I can't even play the piano particularly well with my
    /fingers/; I have no hope of doing so with my toes.

    -dan

    --
    "please make sure that the person is your friend before you confirm"

  20. "Dave Kahn" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    However, running over the tiles in line with the grooves is decidedly
    unpleasant.

    So cycle on the road instead then ;-)

    --

    Richard

    --------------------

    Individual replies to [email hidden]

    less the Misdirections (and note the underscore after r246)

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.