| 研究生: |
王詩瑜 Shih-Yu Wang |
|---|---|
| 論文名稱: |
MCI應用於臺灣國道一號鋪面調查之可行性評估 The Preliminary Study of MCI to Inspect Taiwan Freeway No. 1 Pavement Condition |
| 指導教授: |
陳世晃
Shih-Huang Chen 林志棟 Jyh-Dong Lin |
| 口試委員: | |
| 學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
| 系所名稱: |
工學院 - 土木工程學系 Department of Civil Engineering |
| 論文出版年: | 2019 |
| 畢業學年度: | 107 |
| 語文別: | 中文 |
| 論文頁數: | 119 |
| 中文關鍵詞: | 高速公路 、鋪面維護管理指標 、鋪面調查 |
| 外文關鍵詞: | Freeway, Maintenance Control Index, Pavement survey |
| 相關次數: | 點閱:19 下載:0 |
| 分享至: |
| 查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
日本道路協會參考AASHTO鋪面現況服務能力指標(Present Serviceability Index,PSI)之建立模式,結合日本常見鋪面損壞形式,建立日本PSI。1980年代,日本建設省土木研究所以美國及日本之PSI,使用多元迴歸開發維護管理指標(Maintenance Control Index, MCI),與傳統鋪面狀況指標(Pavement Condition Index, PCI)相比計算更為簡易。研究以中央大學與日本研究團隊共同開發的道路鋪面檢測車調查國道一號南下374.3車道公里,調查項目包含裂縫率、車轍深度及國際糙度指標(IRI),探討MCI應用於臺灣高速公路鋪面調查之可行性。此外,研究蒐集ETC(Electronic Toll Collection)資料進行交通量分群,中位數檢定結果顯示不同養護工程分局轄區之交通量有差異,且MCI亦有差異,說明交通量為影響鋪面服務品質之因素之一,研究建議管理者於設定管理目標或門檻時應依據不同地區條件有所調整。因目前臺灣未建立MCI相關規範,故研究利用95%信心水準及日本首都高速公路MCI養護目標5.6評估國道一號鋪面現況,結果顯示達95%以上路段鋪面品質符合日本首都高速公路養護目標。最後,研究蒐集國道北區養護工程分局108年整修計畫資料與MCI調查結果比較,整修計畫路段中MCI小於5.6之路段占全轄區MCI小於5.6路段之71%。研究利用MCI0結果計算之移動平均可挑選出鋪面破壞較嚴重之路段,且與目前整修計畫所預計整修路段重合度高。綜合本研究成果,研究認為MCI能夠簡化臺灣高速公路鋪面調查作業,且能夠快速評估鋪面破壞情形,值得進一步研究與採用。
The Japanese PSI was set up by Japan Road Association by means of AASHTO Present Serviceability Index (PSI) as reference. In the 1980s, the Japan Institute of Civil Engineering set up the Maintenance Control Index (MCI) based on multiple regression, MCI made the roads easier to assess than Pavement Condition Index (PCI). This study collect the road conditions of National Freeway No. 1 section 374.3 km-lane south surveyed by vehicle. It is jointly developed by the National Central University and the Japanese research team. The vehicle is capable to survey cracks, rut and International Roughness Index (IRI). Taiwan Electronic Toll Collection (ETC) traffic data for National Freeway No. 1 was collected for clustering purpose. The median test showed that there are differences in traffic volume between freeway branch. MCI also showed the same result. So this study proposes that the authority should set various criteria or thresholds as depends on various conditions. This study used 95% confidence level and Japan Capital Expressway MCI Maintenance standard of 5.6 to evaluate the current freeway conditions of National Freeway No.1. The outcomes demonstrated that over 95% of the pavement quality meets the Japanese standard. The study also analyzed the 2019 renovation plan of the northern branch. The MCI survey found the freeway section with MCI less than 5.6 include 71% of the renovation plan. By using the moving average to select the worse section of highway. It is highly match to the current renovation plan. In summary, this study considered that MCI can simplify the freeway survey in Taiwan and rapidly evaluate the damage of pavements. It is worth to be used and further research.
交通部高速公路局,2016,「國道1號高雄端至仁德系統北上路段鋪面數據分析計畫成果報告」,成果報告書。
交通部高速公路局,2019,「高速公路養護手冊」。
朱信忠,2009,「Kolmogorov-Smirnov統計測試技術」,台電核能月刊,324期,第56-66頁。
李寧,2018,「鋪面自動化檢測於北區高速公路之應用」,第十三屆鋪面材料再生及再利用研討會暨2018世界華人鋪面專家聯合學術研討會。
周家蓓、曾志煌、陳茂南、巫柏蕙、李美慧、蔡鎮宇、丘宜謙,2005,「路面品質績效量測設備開發先導計畫」,交通部運輸研究所。
洪毓麟,2009,「以國際糙度指標與鋪面破損指標提升道路維護管理水準之研究」,國立中央大學土木工程學系,碩士論文。
陳永林,2003,「HDM-4運用於國內高速公路養護管理之研究」,國立中央大學土木工程學系,碩士論文。
郭俊宏,2017,「以ETC大數據結合FWD建立台灣區高速公路鋪面結構評估準則之研究」,國立中央大學土木工程學系,碩士論文。
張力維,2010,「鋪面平坦度規範與指標轉換分析之研究」,國立臺灣大學土木工程學系,碩士論文。
廖小媛,2009,「以力學-經驗準則探討溫度與重車載重對高速公路柔性鋪面之影響」,國立中央大學土木工程學系,博士論文。
廖啟州,2009,「國道柔性鋪面溫度分佈對鋪面破壞與服務年限之影響」,國立中央大學土木工程學系,博士論文。
蔡靜雯,2015,「R-web資料分析應用:相關暨列聯表分析–相關係數」,臺北醫學大學生物統計研究中心,生物統計研究中心eNews,8期。
日本道路協会,2006,「舗装設計施工指針 平成18年度版」。
日本道路協会,2013,「舗装の維持修繕ガイドブック2013」。
日本道路協会,2019,「舗装調査・試験法便覧 平成31年版」。
角川浩二、榎戸宏樹,2000,「利用者費用を考慮した道路舗装の維持修繕の改善—維持管理指数(MCI)に基づく維持修繕基準の見直し‐」,土木學會第 55 回年次學術講演會。
首都高速道路株式会社,2017,「都道首都高速1 号線等に関する維持、修繕その他の管理の報告書」。
國土交通部道路局,2017,「舗装点検要領」。
AASHTO (1993). “AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures,” American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C.
ASTM Standard. E1170-97. (2012). “Practices for Simulating Vehicular Response to Longitudinal Profiles of Traveled Surfaces,” E17 Committee West Conshohocken, USA.
Adlinge, S. S., & Gupta, A. K. (2013). “Pavement deterioration and its causes,” International Journal of Innovative Research and Development, 2(4), 437-450.
AECOM, (2016). “Town of Cary FY2017 pavement condition survey,” Corporate Center Drive, NCBELS Licensure No. F-0342.
ASTM Standard. D6433-16. (2018). “Standard Practice of Roads and Parking Lots Pavement Condition Index Surveys”, American Society of Testing and Materials, ASTM International, Pennsylvania, USA.
Brewer, K. A. (2007). “AASHTO Maintenance Manual for Roadways and Bridges,” American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D. C..
Behiry, A. E. A. E. M. (2012). “Fatigue and rutting lives in flexible pavement,” Ain Shams Engineering Journal, 3(4), 367-374.
Federal Highway Administration (2003). “Pavement Preservation Compendium,” Washington, Publication, No. FHWA-IF-03-21.
Federal Highway Administration (2016). “Highway Performance Monitoring System Field Manual,” Highway Policy Information, Office of Management & Budget (OMB) Control No. 2125-0028.
Huang, Y. H. (2004). “Pavement Analysis and Design,” 2nd ed., Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
International Standards Organization (2014). “ISO 55000: 2014 Asset management: Overview, principles and terminology.”
Jeong, J.H., Lim, J.S., Suh, Y.C., Nam, J.H. (2014). “Development of Performance Criteria for Korean Pavement Warranty Specification,” Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 28(2).
Loprencipe, G., Cantisani, G. (2013). “Unified analysis of road pavement profiles for evaluation of surface characteristics,” Modern Applied Science, 7(8).
Mubaraki, M. (2016). “Highway subsurface assessment using pavement surface distress and roughness data,” International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology, 9(5), 393-402.
Park, H. S., Bail, D. K. (2006). “A study for control of client value using cluster analysis, “Journal of network and Computer Applications, 29, 262-276.
Pierce, L. M., McGovern, G., Zimmerman, K. A. (2013). “Practical guide for quality management of pavement condition data collection,” Washington, Federal Highway Administration, No. FHWA-HIF-14-006.
Saraf, C. L. (1998). “Pavement condition rating system: review of PCR methodology,” Ohio, Dept. of Transportation, No. FHWA/OH-99/004.
Simpson, A. L., Rada, G. R., Visintine, B. A., Groeger, J. (2016). “Interstate Pavement Condition Sampling,” United States, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Asset Management, No. FHWA-HIF-17-022.
Woodward, M. (2013). “Epidemiology: study design and data analysis,” Chapman and Hall/CRC.
WSDOT Officer of Strategic Assessment and Performance Analysis(OSAPA). (2015). “An overview of pavement performance requirements for the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act,” Map-21& Pavement, Washington State Department of Transportation.