首页> 外文期刊>NDT & E international >Continuous real-time monitoring of flexible pavement layer density and thickness using ground penetrating radar
【24h】

Continuous real-time monitoring of flexible pavement layer density and thickness using ground penetrating radar

机译:使用探地雷达连续实时监测柔性路面层的密度和厚度

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Static or discrete time prediction of flexible pavement asphalt concrete (AC) layer density and thickness utilizing the ground penetrating radar (GPR) has proved to be relatively accurate compared to other in-situ methods. However, the accuracy during continuous monitoring of construction has not been validated by real construction projects. This study investigated the continuous estimation of AC layer density and thickness using GPR at a construction site in Macomb, Illinois. The first test compared AC layer density and thickness for pavement segments built in two consecutive days. The second test evaluated the construction quality of pavement segments built utilizing two types of material transfer vehicles (MTV). The GPRan software and the proposed truncation algorithm were used to calculate AC layer thickness continuously. The AC layer density and thickness estimation results were compared to core data using the ALL model. The GPR estimation values were found to be reliable. Errors of thickness results between continuous GPR data and core data from two tests are approximate 3% and 6%, respectively. The density of the new pavement segments was larger than the old ones while the thickness was almost the same. The average error between continuous density predictions and core density was 3%. The two MTVs performed similarly based on layer thickness and density results.
机译:与其他现场方法相比,使用地面穿透雷达(GPR)预测的柔性路面沥青混凝土(AC)层密度和厚度的静态或离散时间预测已证明相对准确。但是,实际施工项目尚未验证连续监测施工过程中的准确性。这项研究调查了在伊利诺伊州Macomb的一个建筑工地使用GPR连续估算AC层密度和厚度的方法。第一次测试比较了连续两天建造的路面的AC层密度和厚度。第二项测试评估了使用两种类型的材料转运车(MTV)建造的人行道的施工质量。使用GPRan软件和提出的截断算法来连续计算AC层厚度。使用ALL模型将AC层密度和厚度估算结果与核心数据进行比较。发现GPR估计值是可靠的。两次测试的连续GPR数据和岩心数据之间的厚度结果误差分别约为3%和6%。新的人行道路段的密度大于旧的人行道路段,而厚度几乎相同。连续密度预测和岩心密度之间的平均误差为3%。根据层厚和密度结果,两个MTV的执行情况相似。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号