比较交通速度偏转仪和噪声调制探地雷达的快速路面调查数据

W. Muller, B. Reeves
{"title":"比较交通速度偏转仪和噪声调制探地雷达的快速路面调查数据","authors":"W. Muller, B. Reeves","doi":"10.1109/ICGPR.2012.6254917","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The measurement of deflection under load is fundamental to the assessment of road pavement strength. Many authors have described the benefits of using GPR data to enhance assessment of deflection measurements made by devices such as the Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD). However while GPR investigations can be undertaken quickly, FWD and other existing deflection methods are much slower which in turn limits productivity. This paper describes a 2010 field trial comparing data from two highway speed road measurement devices: the Danish made Traffic Speed Deflectometer (TSD) and the Australian made 3-D noise modulated ground penetrating radar (NM-GPR) system used in the `Roadscout' vehicle. Around 350 lane-kilometers of data from these devices were compared, showing a clear correlation. The methods were found to be particularly useful when used in combination - the TSD indicating where the pavement was weak, strong or variable and the GPR providing additional information to indicate why. In many cases changes in the data from both methods coincided, providing a direct indication of the cause of the change. In other instances either the TSD or GPR varied and the other method did not, indicating a different type of cause. It quickly became clear that the methods were complementary, providing two independent measurements of pavement response on which to assess current conditions. Overall the correlation between the NM-GPR and TSD data from this trial indicates great promise for using these methods in combination in the future. These methods provide key data needed to achieve rapid, large scale road pavement investigations, collected without public disruption at highway speeds.","PeriodicalId":443640,"journal":{"name":"2012 14th International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR)","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing traffic speed deflectometer and noise-modulated ground penetrating radar data for rapid road pavement investigations\",\"authors\":\"W. Muller, B. Reeves\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ICGPR.2012.6254917\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The measurement of deflection under load is fundamental to the assessment of road pavement strength. Many authors have described the benefits of using GPR data to enhance assessment of deflection measurements made by devices such as the Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD). However while GPR investigations can be undertaken quickly, FWD and other existing deflection methods are much slower which in turn limits productivity. This paper describes a 2010 field trial comparing data from two highway speed road measurement devices: the Danish made Traffic Speed Deflectometer (TSD) and the Australian made 3-D noise modulated ground penetrating radar (NM-GPR) system used in the `Roadscout' vehicle. Around 350 lane-kilometers of data from these devices were compared, showing a clear correlation. The methods were found to be particularly useful when used in combination - the TSD indicating where the pavement was weak, strong or variable and the GPR providing additional information to indicate why. In many cases changes in the data from both methods coincided, providing a direct indication of the cause of the change. In other instances either the TSD or GPR varied and the other method did not, indicating a different type of cause. It quickly became clear that the methods were complementary, providing two independent measurements of pavement response on which to assess current conditions. Overall the correlation between the NM-GPR and TSD data from this trial indicates great promise for using these methods in combination in the future. These methods provide key data needed to achieve rapid, large scale road pavement investigations, collected without public disruption at highway speeds.\",\"PeriodicalId\":443640,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2012 14th International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR)\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2012 14th International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICGPR.2012.6254917\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2012 14th International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICGPR.2012.6254917","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

荷载下挠度的测量是路面强度评定的基础。许多作者描述了使用探地雷达数据来增强由诸如下落重量偏转计(FWD)等设备进行的偏转测量评估的好处。然而,虽然探地雷达调查可以快速进行,但FWD和其他现有的偏转方法要慢得多,这反过来又限制了生产力。本文描述了2010年的一项实地试验,比较了两种高速公路速度测量设备的数据:丹麦制造的交通速度偏测仪(TSD)和澳大利亚制造的三维噪声调制探地雷达(NM-GPR)系统,用于“道路侦察兵”车辆。从这些设备中获得的大约350车道公里的数据进行了比较,显示出明显的相关性。我们发现,这两种方法结合使用时特别有用——TSD显示路面薄弱、坚固或易变的地方,而探地雷达则提供额外的信息,说明原因。在许多情况下,两种方法的数据变化是一致的,这提供了变化原因的直接指示。在其他情况下,TSD或GPR变化,而另一种方法没有,表明不同类型的原因。很快就发现,这两种方法是互补的,可以提供两种独立的路面响应测量方法,以评估当前的路面状况。总的来说,这次试验的纳米波探地雷达和TSD数据之间的相关性表明,未来将这些方法结合使用是很有希望的。这些方法提供了实现快速、大规模道路路面调查所需的关键数据,这些数据的收集不会在高速公路上造成公共干扰。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing traffic speed deflectometer and noise-modulated ground penetrating radar data for rapid road pavement investigations
The measurement of deflection under load is fundamental to the assessment of road pavement strength. Many authors have described the benefits of using GPR data to enhance assessment of deflection measurements made by devices such as the Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD). However while GPR investigations can be undertaken quickly, FWD and other existing deflection methods are much slower which in turn limits productivity. This paper describes a 2010 field trial comparing data from two highway speed road measurement devices: the Danish made Traffic Speed Deflectometer (TSD) and the Australian made 3-D noise modulated ground penetrating radar (NM-GPR) system used in the `Roadscout' vehicle. Around 350 lane-kilometers of data from these devices were compared, showing a clear correlation. The methods were found to be particularly useful when used in combination - the TSD indicating where the pavement was weak, strong or variable and the GPR providing additional information to indicate why. In many cases changes in the data from both methods coincided, providing a direct indication of the cause of the change. In other instances either the TSD or GPR varied and the other method did not, indicating a different type of cause. It quickly became clear that the methods were complementary, providing two independent measurements of pavement response on which to assess current conditions. Overall the correlation between the NM-GPR and TSD data from this trial indicates great promise for using these methods in combination in the future. These methods provide key data needed to achieve rapid, large scale road pavement investigations, collected without public disruption at highway speeds.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信