| |
In the next example, if we compare the habitual information that
we have, we have got the next:
|
| |
track 1 |
track 2 |
|
distance: |
23,1km. |
49,5km. |
|
Accumulated meters : |
768m. |
925m. |
|
| |
This comparison make us thing that track 2 is harder than track
1.
They are more than the double of Km, and some meters accumulated
more.When analyzing them, we can observe that in track 1 we
raise a 47’7 of the total km, with and average raise of 6.99. In
track 2 we raise a 35.8 of the total km and the raise average is a
5.21.
IBP index show us an equal hardness in both
routes.
|
| |
track 1 |
track 2 |
|
IBP: |
63,05 |
62,01 |
|
|
|
File
information
1 |
| File name |
Track 1 |
| Format |
OziExplorer |
| Analyzed track points |
898 |
| IBP |
63,05 |
| Information colour and graphics |
|
|
|
|
|
File
information
2 |
| File name |
Track 2 |
| Format |
OziExplorer |
| Analzed trak point |
1052 |
| IBP |
62,01 |
| Color datos y gráficos |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Main
Information |
| |
| Total distance |
23,155 Km |
|
| 49,552 Km. |
|
| |
| Positive difference |
768,35 m. |
|
| 925,07 m. |
|
| |
| Negative difference |
762,87 m. |
|
| 966,52 m. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
raises
|
| Between... |
Km |
% of the total |
| 1 and 5% |
4,582 |
19,79 |
|
| 12,272 |
24,77 |
|
| |
| 5 and 10% |
4,235 |
18,29 |
|
| 3,867 |
7,8 |
|
| |
| 10 and 15% |
1,45 |
6,26 |
|
| 1,136 |
2,29 |
|
| |
| 15 and 50% |
0,709 |
3,06 |
|
| 0,401 |
0,81 |
|
| |
| 50 and 100% |
0,004 |
0,02 |
|
| 0,049 |
0,1 |
|
| |
| Total raises |
10,985 |
47,44 |
|
| 17,754 |
35,83 |
|
| |
| Ratio raises |
6,99 |
|
| 5,21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Descents
|
| Between... |
Km |
% of the total |
| 1 and 50% |
9,547 |
41,23 |
|
| 20,737 |
41,85 |
|
| |
| 50 and100% |
0,011 |
0,05 |
|
| 0,056 |
0,11 |
|
| |
| Total descents |
9,559 |
41,28 |
|
| 20,872 |
42,12 |
|
| |
| Ratio descents |
7,98 |
|
| 4,63 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plain
|
| Between... |
Km |
% of the total |
| -1 and +1% |
2,611 |
11,28 |
|
| 10,932 |
22,06 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| IBP difficulty |
63,05 |
|
| 62,01 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
