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
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] A comparison between 2D and 3D methods of quantifying facial morphology
    Anas, I. Y.
    Bamgbose, B. O.
    Nuhu, Saleh
    HELIYON, 2019, 5 (06)
  • [2] Comparison between 3D and 2D Cephalometric Analyses
    Bholsithi, W.
    Sinthanayothin, C.
    Chintakanon, K.
    Komolpis, R.
    Tharanon, W.
    4TH KUALA LUMPUR INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING 2008, VOLS 1 AND 2, 2008, 21 (1-2): : 540 - +
  • [3] 2D and 3D analysis methods of facial asymmetry in comparison
    Berssenbruegge, Philipp
    Berlin, Nina Franka
    Kebeck, Guenther
    Runte, Christoph
    Jung, Susanne
    Kleinheinz, Johannes
    Dirksen, Dieter
    JOURNAL OF CRANIO-MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2014, 42 (06) : E327 - E334
  • [4] Usability Comparison between 2D and 3D Control Methods for the Operation of Hovering Objects
    Lee, Daeseong
    Kim, Hajun
    Yoon, Heesoo
    Lee, Wonsup
    DRONES, 2023, 7 (08)
  • [5] Registration Using Nanotube Stationary Tomosynthesis: Comparison of 3D/3D to 3D/2D Methods
    Frederick, B.
    Lalush, D.
    Chang, S.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2010, 37 (06)
  • [6] Evaluating 2D/3D registration accuracy
    LaRose, D
    Bayouth, J
    Kanade, T
    CARS 2000: COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOLOGY AND SURGERY, 2000, 1214 : 147 - 152
  • [7] Comparison between a 2D froth and a cut of 3D froth
    Oger, L
    Richard, P
    Troadec, JP
    Gervois, A
    POWDERS AND GRAINS 2001, 2001, : 7 - 10
  • [8] Qualitative Comparison of 2D and 3D Atmospheric Corrosion Detection Methods
    De Kerf, Thomas
    Hasheminejad, Navid
    Blom, Johan
    Vanlanduit, Steve
    MATERIALS, 2021, 14 (13)
  • [9] Differences in Accuracy and Radiation Dose in Placement of Iliosacral Screws: Comparison between 3D and 2D Fluoroscopy
    Kulakowski, Michal
    Reichert, Pawel
    Elster, Karol
    Witkowski, Jaroslaw
    Sleczka, Pawel
    Morasiewicz, Piotr
    Oleksy, Lukasz
    Krolikowska, Aleksandra
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2022, 11 (06)
  • [10] Accuracy and reliability of 3D stereophotogrammetry: A comparison to direct anthropometry and 2D photogrammetry
    Dindaroglu, Furkan
    Kutlu, Pinar
    Duran, Gokhan Serhat
    Gorgulu, Serkan
    Aslan, Erhan
    ANGLE ORTHODONTIST, 2016, 86 (03) : 487 - 494