Rutting is one of the dominant pavement distresses, hence, the accuracy of rut depth measurements can have a substantial impact on the maintenance and rehabilitation （M 8： R） strategies and funding allocation. Diff...Rutting is one of the dominant pavement distresses, hence, the accuracy of rut depth measurements can have a substantial impact on the maintenance and rehabilitation （M 8： R） strategies and funding allocation. Different computation algorithms such as straight- edge method and wire line method, which are based on the same raw data, may lead to rut depth estimation which are not always consistent. Therefore, there is an urgent need to assess the impact of algorithm types on the accuracy of rut depth computation. In this paper, a 1B-point-based laser sensor detection technology, commonly accepted in China for rut depth measurements, was used to obtain a database of 85,000 field transverse profiles having three representative rutting shapes with small, medium and high severity rut levels. Based on the reconstruction of real transverse profiles, the consequences from two different algorithms were compared. Results showed that there is a combined effect of rut depth and profile shape on the rut depth computation accuracy. As expected, the dif- ference between the results obtained with the two computation methods increases with deeper rutting sections： when the distress is above 15 mm （severe level）, the average dif- ference between the two computation methods is above 1.5 mm, normally, the wire line method provides larger results. The computation suggests that the rutting shapes have a minimal influence on the results. An in-depth analysis showed that the upheaval outside of the wheel path is a dominant shape factor which results in higher computation differences.展开更多
采用蒙特卡洛方法(MCM)对平尺最小二乘直线度和最小条件直线度进行测量不确定度评估。通过与测量不确定度评定指南法(GUM)的评估结果进行比较发现,MCM评估出的最小二乘直线度和最小条件直线度的测量不确定度分别比GUM评估结果小0.028μm...采用蒙特卡洛方法(MCM)对平尺最小二乘直线度和最小条件直线度进行测量不确定度评估。通过与测量不确定度评定指南法(GUM)的评估结果进行比较发现,MCM评估出的最小二乘直线度和最小条件直线度的测量不确定度分别比GUM评估结果小0.028μm和0.026μm。在给定的0.05μm允差范围内,两种评估方法对直线度测量不确定度的评估均有效。统计检验采用了kolmogorov-smirnov检验法、jarque-bera检验法、normal probability plot图示法、偏度和峰度检验法。通过对两种不同定义直线度的测量模型进行统计检验分析发现,被测量分布函数与正态分布的峰度偏离是造成差异的主要原因。展开更多
基金sponsored by China Postdoctoral Science Foundation(2014M562287)National Natural Science Foundation of China(51508034,51408083,51508064)
文摘Rutting is one of the dominant pavement distresses, hence, the accuracy of rut depth measurements can have a substantial impact on the maintenance and rehabilitation （M 8： R） strategies and funding allocation. Different computation algorithms such as straight- edge method and wire line method, which are based on the same raw data, may lead to rut depth estimation which are not always consistent. Therefore, there is an urgent need to assess the impact of algorithm types on the accuracy of rut depth computation. In this paper, a 1B-point-based laser sensor detection technology, commonly accepted in China for rut depth measurements, was used to obtain a database of 85,000 field transverse profiles having three representative rutting shapes with small, medium and high severity rut levels. Based on the reconstruction of real transverse profiles, the consequences from two different algorithms were compared. Results showed that there is a combined effect of rut depth and profile shape on the rut depth computation accuracy. As expected, the dif- ference between the results obtained with the two computation methods increases with deeper rutting sections： when the distress is above 15 mm （severe level）, the average dif- ference between the two computation methods is above 1.5 mm, normally, the wire line method provides larger results. The computation suggests that the rutting shapes have a minimal influence on the results. An in-depth analysis showed that the upheaval outside of the wheel path is a dominant shape factor which results in higher computation differences.
文摘采用蒙特卡洛方法(MCM)对平尺最小二乘直线度和最小条件直线度进行测量不确定度评估。通过与测量不确定度评定指南法(GUM)的评估结果进行比较发现,MCM评估出的最小二乘直线度和最小条件直线度的测量不确定度分别比GUM评估结果小0.028μm和0.026μm。在给定的0.05μm允差范围内,两种评估方法对直线度测量不确定度的评估均有效。统计检验采用了kolmogorov-smirnov检验法、jarque-bera检验法、normal probability plot图示法、偏度和峰度检验法。通过对两种不同定义直线度的测量模型进行统计检验分析发现,被测量分布函数与正态分布的峰度偏离是造成差异的主要原因。
