No job yet but back in the game!
I've been thinking of how to create this model... my earlier approach may have been wrong.
I've got an idea that might be crazy but would be pretty cool. I'd like to have the program written for the iphone. It has GPS and an accelerometer built into it. PERFECTO.
Also, I think having two sets of iteration would be better than one complicated one.
One set for the gradient, and the other set for the aerodynamic and rolling losses.
I should have realized earlier that gradient has a bigger role on the vehicle than aero at city speeds.
For example: a 5 degree downslope over a distance of 100 m. If my initial velocity is 10 m/s, i would first ignore the aero and rolling losses and calculate the energy gain and final velocity.
second, I would assume linear acceleration over the course and subtract the energy lost [ave(aero force) * distance] for the course. this could give a final kinetic energy of the vehicle and thus a more accurate velocity at the end of the course.
HOWEVER, if a more simplified method of driving was assumed. Maybe one that requires acceleration to be limited to under a certain number, the Iphone app might could be very easily put together with a little dial that measured your acceleration and warned you when you accelerated too much.
An example of driving this way seems to be efficient. Speeding up down hills and slowing down up hills. Constant velocity on flat areas. It's a little confusing to picture it working, but if you slowed down going up a hill, wouldn't the accelerometer not 'feel' all of the acceleration of gravity that's affecting the car? If you maintained constant velocity, the accelerometer would feel the acceleration of gravity but slowing down balances the forces on it I believe... ?
