Accuracy Comparison of Roadway Earthwork Computation between 3D and 2D Methods

被引:13
|
作者
Cheng, Jian-chuan [1 ]
Jiang, Long-jian [1 ]
机构
[1] Southeast Univ, Sch Transportat, Nanjing 210096, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
来源
INTELLIGENT AND INTEGRATED SUSTAINABLE MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS PROCEEDINGS FROM THE 13TH COTA INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF TRANSPORTATION PROFESSIONALS (CICTP2013) | 2013年 / 96卷
关键词
earthwork volume; highway design; 3D method; average-end-area method; VOLUME ESTIMATION; COST; SIMULATION; DESIGN; GRADES; MODEL; FILL; CUT;
D O I
10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.08.145
中图分类号
U [交通运输];
学科分类号
08 ; 0823 ;
摘要
This study aims to calculate the earthwork volume in 3D method that has been seldom used before in roadway engineering, and to reconfirm the feasibility of average-end-area method for earthwork volume that is widely used in literature. After reviewing the related studies and comparing various CAD packages, the analysis of accuracy difference between 3D method and average-end-area method is conducted. It shows that in average-end-area method the critical value of interval distance between two consecutive cross sections is 30m. It also shows that the Change Rate of Cut-Fill (CRCF) value, an index firstly proposed to represent the cut-fill variance frequency associated with roadway terrain, alignment and profile design, has no significant impacts on the accuracy of 2D result. It is concluded that the 3D method could be easily used in practice with the CAD software. Meanwhile, average-end-area method with less than the critical interval distance between two consecutive cross sections can guarantee the earthwork calculation accuracy. (C) 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:1277 / 1285
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] PREDICTION OF ICE ACCRETION - COMPARISON BETWEEN THE 2D AND 3D CODES
    GUFFOND, D
    HEDDE, T
    RECHERCHE AEROSPATIALE, 1994, (02): : 103 - 115
  • [2] OIL SPILL TRAJECTORY: A COMPARISON BETWEEN 2D AND 3D MODELS
    Soussi, Abdellatif
    Bersani, Chiara
    Tomasoni, Angela Maria
    URBAN AND MARITIME TRANSPORT XXVII, 2021, 2021, 204 : 117 - 128
  • [3] A Comparison of Satellite Signal Simulation in Street Canyon in 2D and 3D Deterministic Methods
    Moghadam, Hossein Hadidian
    Foudazi, Ali
    Kouki, Ammar B.
    2017 IEEE INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION & USNC/URSI NATIONAL RADIO SCIENCE MEETING, 2017, : 599 - 600
  • [4] Comparison of 3D and 2D menus for cell phones
    Kim, Kyungdoh
    Proctor, Robert W.
    Salvendy, Gavriel
    COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2011, 27 (05) : 2056 - 2066
  • [5] Comparison Between Optimal Interconnection Network in Different 2D and 3D NoC Structures
    Radfar, Farzad
    Zabihi, Masoud
    Sarvari, Reza
    2014 27TH IEEE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM-ON-CHIP CONFERENCE (SOCC), 2014, : 171 - 176
  • [6] Comparison between 2d and 3d behavior of sheet piles by finite element method
    Jesmani, Mehrab
    Mehdipour, Iman
    Ajami, Azade
    KUWAIT JOURNAL OF SCIENCE & ENGINEERING, 2011, 38 (2B): : 1 - 16
  • [7] Comparison of 1D, 2D and 3D quench onset simulations
    Stenvall, A.
    Mikkonen, R.
    Kovac, P.
    PHYSICA C-SUPERCONDUCTIVITY AND ITS APPLICATIONS, 2010, 470 (22): : 2047 - 2050
  • [8] Accurate Numerical Methods for Computing 2D and 3D Robot Workspace
    Cao, Yi
    Lu, Ke
    Li, Xiujuan
    Zang, Yi
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED ROBOTIC SYSTEMS, 2011, 8 (06): : 1 - 13
  • [9] 2D and 3D A* Algorithm Comparison for UAS Traffic Management Systems
    Potter Neto, Carlos Augusto
    Bertoli, Gustavo de Carvalho
    Saotome, Osamu
    2020 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (ICUAS'20), 2020, : 72 - 76
  • [10] Method Comparison of 3D Facial Reconstruction Coresponding to 2D Image
    Tjahyaningtijas, H. P. A.
    Puspitasari, P.
    Yamasari, Y.
    Anifah, L.
    Buditjahyanto, I. G. P. A.
    2ND ANNUAL APPLIED SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING CONFERENCE (AASEC 2017), 2018, 288