Is it more efficient to walk in a staircase-like pattern, or “down and across”?

1.67K views

I live in a city and, like most cities, it’s pretty much a grid. My daily destination is the exact opposite location of where I live. I was interested in knowing which method of walking will save me the most time, or if it matters at all?

In: Other

5 Answers

Anonymous 0 Comments

If you start with a staircase, you can go whichever direction has a walk signal. That can cut quite a bit of time.

Anonymous 0 Comments

As far as down and across versus over up over up – exactly the same distance assuming a perfect grid.

Not accounting for any time you’re NOT walking (Such as waiting at a street corner which may or may not be predictable), whatever gives you the shortest distance. e.g. the closest to a straight line as is possible is fastest. So if there’s for example, a park you can cut through diagonally that will save you time. Given a perfect grid with none of these opportunities – doesn’t matter.

Anonymous 0 Comments

It doesn’t matter.

What you are talking about is called the [Manhattan Distance](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Manhattan_distance) — also known as [Taxicab Geometry](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicab_geometry).

If you can only walk on grid lines, then it does not matter if you follow a zigzag pattern or all-the-way-down-then-all-the-way-across.

In practice, not all grid lines are the same. You should choose the path that is the easiest for walking — crosswalks that are less crowded and street crossings that don’t have long red lights.

Anonymous 0 Comments

Depends on the traffic of said streets. Either way distance traveled is the same. Everything else being equal, “Down and across” will save you time from less turns.

Anonymous 0 Comments

Distance should be pretty much the same in this scenario, I think the main difference in time would be the crossings and how busy each route is at the time that you use it