论文部分内容阅读
本文首先对水泥混凝土路面和沥青混凝土路面在不同的交通量和地基回弹模量情况下进行了结构设计;随即从经济和能耗角度出发,以30年为计算期,年折现率取为8％,对两种路面进行比较分析,结论认为:a.水泥混凝土路面的初期建筑投资虽较沥青混凝土路面高出13％,但是前者在计算期内总费用现值要较后者节约21％;效益成本比达3.16;投资差回偿年限为8～11年;内部回收率达22％。b.地基回弹模量每增高20MPa,水泥混凝土路面各项费用总现值可节约5.27％,而沥青混凝土路面仅节约1.65％。c.当计算沥青混凝土路面的能耗时,应当计入沥青本身所含蓄能量的的一部分,这部分究竟多少,应当作具体分析。但即使计入沥青本身能量的一小部分,如10％,沥青混凝土路面的能耗仍要超过水泥混凝土路面。
In this paper, the structural design of cement concrete pavement and asphalt concrete pavement with different traffic volumes and the foundation resilience modulus is carried out firstly. Then from the perspective of economy and energy consumption, the calculation period is 30 years, and the annual discount rate is taken as 8%. After comparing and analyzing the two kinds of pavement, the conclusion is that: a. Although the initial construction investment of cement concrete pavement is 13% higher than that of asphalt concrete pavement, the present value of total cost of the former is 21% ; Cost-benefit ratio of 3.16; poor investment return period of 8 to 11 years; internal recovery rate of 22%. b. For every 20 MPa increase in the rebound modulus of the foundation, the total present value of the various expenses on the cement concrete pavement can be saved by 5.27% while the asphalt concrete pavement saves only 1.65%. c. When calculating the energy consumption of asphalt concrete pavement, it should be taken into account part of the energy contained in the asphalt itself, how much of this part should be a specific analysis. However, even with a small fraction of the energy of the asphalt itself, say 10%, the energy consumption of asphalt pavement still exceeds the cement concrete pavement.