【作者】 肖勇；

【导师】 王福建；

【作者基本信息】 浙江大学 ， 建筑与土木工程， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 互通式立体交叉设计人员往往在规范符合性方面做的较好,对于规范或标准未涉及之处就凭经验设计或视而不见,不当之处往往形成事故隐患,造成不必要的损失。从实践来看,仅仅依靠《公路项目安全性评价指南》与公路相关规范进行互通式立体交叉安全性分析是不够的,还需要从交通流运行情况、交通组织、交通工程学等方面深入分析,以形成较为全面的互通式立体交叉安全性评价体系,本文采用三个实例加以说明。第1例是杭浦高速绕城东枢纽安全性分析。依据国内现行标准规范和国内外相关成熟理论、方法及文献资料,首先按照《公路项目安全性评价指南》进行道路符合性检查,再使用美国《道路通行能力手册》HCM2000配套程序对相关路段进行运行速度与服务水平的计算。从计算结果分析来看:1.下沙互通与绕城东枢纽之间基本路段服务水平较低,在2010年、2020年表现为F级。2.绕城东枢纽与海宁互通之间的两个交织区中的交织车辆与非交织车辆的运行速度存在差异。根据分析结果,提出如下建议:1.下沙互通与绕城东枢纽之间基本路段进行拓宽处理。2.海宁互通与绕城东枢纽之间交织区进行渠化处理。3.对该区域安全设施及标志标线设置作统筹设计。第2例是事故多发互通区的分析整改。分析主体是南湖互通与嘉兴枢纽之间交织路段,安全性评价内容为运行速度计算、服务水平确定、运行分析,计算方法与第1例相同,分别按照当前方案(A方案)与预设整改方案(B方案)进行分析。计算结果分析:A方案交织构型为C型,全区域服务水平为E,车速不均匀,事故概率高;B方案交织构型为A型,其在区域Ⅰ服务水平为A,分区均匀,事故概率一般。嘉兴市交通部门根据B方案对该路段进行了整改,事故发生率大大降低,驾驶员反映良好。第3例是临海城西互通匝道平交口安全性分析。本例按照《公路项目安全性评价指南》要求,对平交口的位置、形式、运行速度协调性、转弯半径与转弯速度、视距、交通安全设施等方面进行分析评价,最后根据评价结果分别按照近期、远期提出改善措施,提高了该平交口的安全性。根据上述三个实例的安全性分析,本文认为:1.立交设计应重视安全性。2.超规范小间距立交并非不可为。3.互通式立体交叉安全性分析方法具有多样性与实用性。4.建议在《公路项目安全性评价指南》中增加互通式立体交叉交织区运行情况的评价内容。更多还原

【Abstract】 Interchange designers often with sexual norms do better, to the norms or standards not involved in the design they turn a blind eye or to use their experience, at fault is often hidden causes of accidents, causing unnecessary losses.In light of practice, relying solely on the"Guidelines for Safety Audit of Highway"and relevant norms for interchange safety analysis is not enough, need operation from the traffic flow, traffic, traffic engineering and so on in-depth analysis, in order to form a more comprehensive interchange safety evaluation system, this paper uses three examples to illustrate.The first example is the raochengdong hub interchange of hang-pu highway safety analysis .based on the existing domestic norms and standards at home and abroad related mature theories, methods and documentation, First accordance with the "Guidelines for Safety Audit of Highway" road compliance checks, reuse the United States "Highway Capacity Manual" HCM2000 matching procedures relevant sections of the operating speed and level of service calculation. From the analysis of the calculation results, 1. Xiasha interchange between raochengdong hub interchange basic freeway segment of the lower level of service, Show in 2010 , in 2020 for F level.2. raochengdong hub interchange and haining interchange between weaving vehicle and Nonweaving vehicle operation in two weaving section there exists difference in speed .According to The results of the analysis, puts forward the following proposal:1. Xiasha Interchange between raochengdong hub interchange basic freeway segment expand treatment.2. Haining Interchange between raochengdong hub interchange weaving section intertwined area drainage treatment.3. The regional security facilities and signs marking set up to manpower design.The second example is the accident-prone interchange analysis and ectification. The main analysis is on the Haining Interchange and on the Jiaxing hub Interchange between weaving section, safety evaluation indicators for the operating speed, level of service, operational analysis , Calculation method and the first one example of the same, in accordance with the current program (A program) and set a rectification plan ( B program) analysis.Analysis of results: the weaving confignration of A program is type C, Region-wide service level is E, Speed uneven, the accident probability is high, B program is type A, I regional service levels is grade A, The regional distribution is uniform, The accident probability is general, Jiaxing City Department of Transportation under section B of the program do for improvement, greatly reduce the accident rate, Driving is a reflection of good staff.The third example is Linhai-chengxi interchange ramp- cross-plane safety analysis. In accordance with the "Guidelines for Safety Audit of Highway" requirement, junction on the location, form, coordination of operational speed, turning radius and turning speed, line-of-sight, facilities, and other aspects of traffic safety analysis and evaluation, Final results were under evaluation in accordance with the recent, long-term measures to improve, Increased ramp- cross-Plane Safety.Based on the above three examples of the safety analysis, paper presents the following conclusions:1. Interchange design should attach importance to safety.2. Ultra-small spacing Interchange is not the norms can not be done.3. Interchange safety analysis method has the diversity and practicality.4. Recommendations in the "Guidelines for Safety Audit of Highway" interchange intertwined increase in the weaving section operation of the content evaluation.更多还原