下载文档原格式
道路课程设计答辩一、教学目标本课程的教学目标是使学生掌握道路工程的基本概念、设计原理和施工技术，培养学生具备道路工程设计和施工的基本能力。
具体目标如下：1.知识目标：（1）掌握道路工程的基本概念、分类和组成。
（2）了解道路设计的原则、方法和步骤。
（3）熟悉道路施工的技术要求和管理措施。
（4）了解道路工程质量检测与评价的方法。
2.技能目标：（1）能够运用道路设计原理和方法，进行简单道路工程的设计。
（2）能够根据道路设计图纸，制定施工方案和施工设计。
（3）具备道路工程现场施工管理的能力。
3.情感态度价值观目标：（1）培养学生对道路工程的热爱和敬业精神。
（2）增强学生对道路工程安全、质量、环保等方面的意识。
（3）培养学生具备团队合作精神和沟通协调能力。
二、教学内容本课程的教学内容主要包括道路工程的基本概念、设计原理、施工技术和质量管理等方面。
具体内容包括：1.道路工程概述：道路的分类、组成及特性。
2.道路设计：设计原则、设计方法和步骤。
3.道路施工：施工技术要求、施工设计。
4.道路工程质量检测与评价：质量检测方法、评价指标。
5.道路工程案例分析：分析实际道路工程案例，提高学生解决问题的能力。
三、教学方法为实现教学目标，本课程采用以下教学方法：1.讲授法：讲解道路工程的基本概念、设计原理和施工技术。
2.讨论法：学生针对道路工程实际问题进行讨论，培养学生的创新能力和解决问题的能力。
3.案例分析法：分析实际道路工程案例，使学生更好地理解道路工程的设计和施工。
4.实验法：开展道路工程实验，培养学生的动手能力和实际操作技能。
四、教学资源为实现教学目标，本课程需准备以下教学资源：1.教材：选用权威、实用的道路工程教材作为主要教学资源。
2.参考书：提供相关的道路工程参考书籍，丰富学生的知识体系。
3.多媒体资料：制作精美的教学PPT，演示道路工程的设计和施工过程。
4.实验设备：配备齐全的道路工程实验设备，为学生提供实践操作的机会。
设计提问1.路线设计考虑什么因素(1、满足平纵横组合，2、地理环境，3、技术标准等)2.挡土墙设置位置，以及设置原因（1、路肩墙或路堤墙设置在高填土路堤或陡坡路堤的下方，可以防止路基边坡或基地滑动，确保路基稳定，同时可收缩填土坡脚，减少填土数量，减少拆迁和占地面积，以及保护临近线路的既有建筑物2、滨河及水库路堤，在傍水一侧设置挡土墙，可防止水流对路基的冲刷和侵蚀，也是减少压缩河床或少占库容的有效措施；3、设置在隧道口或明洞口的挡土墙，可缩短隧道或明洞长度，降低工程造价；4、设置在桥梁两端的挡土墙，作为翼墙或桥台，起着护台及连接路堤的作用）3.一二级公路最大区别（各项技术指标）4.一级公路的停车视距时（见公路路基设计规范）5.路拱的设计依据（见公路路基设计规范）6.路线是否有软土，挖深是多少（根据设计资料和软基处理）7.造价是如何计算的（纵横造价）8.毕业设计的最大收获是什么（回答主要设计成果或掌握相关软件）9.两反向曲线间直线最小长度（两倍设计时速，同向曲线为六倍设计时速，例如60km/h对应120m）10.路肩设置依据（见公路路基设计规范）11.做了哪些防护设施（植被防护，护面墙，高填深挖边坡加筋处理等）12.二级公路的路面结构组合是什么样的（见《公路沥青路面设计规范》宣贯路面结构组合设计，各种公路的结构组合都有）13.路线设计中如何考虑行车安全性？（如平缓曲线设计，可视距离要求，隧道通透率要求等）14.如何控制路基填方边坡的坡度？（控制路堤高度和填方坡度比例，进行填方夯实和排水等处理）15.在路线设计中，如何平衡建设成本和道路通行质量？（通过多方面分析和比较，选择合适的设计方案，以在保证安全的前提下尽可能的降低建设成本，同时确保道路通行质量）16.在道路桥梁设计中，如何考虑设计寿命？（了解桥梁材料寿命和设计标准，定期进行检测维护，确保桥梁服务寿命）17.在路线设计中，如何考虑环保因素？（选择合适的建设地点，采取环保措施，缓解施工对环境的影响，例如尽可能减少挖掘量和填方量等）18.在路基设计时，如何考虑道路排水？（确定排水设计标准和排水设施种类，设计合适的路肩和坡度，保证道路顺畅排水，防止积水等）修改意见1.桩号图纸标明2.补充排水设施3.公式加上编号4.方案比选补充（有目的的比选）5.目录分三级6.横断面坡率标注7.使用规范应该是最新的8.补充中央分隔带排水和涵洞排水9.补充交通构造物10.结构组合问题，应该从上到下越来越厚11.文献标示改为上标12.曲线半径太小13.交叉口是怎么考虑的14.需要英文参考文献（不是外文翻译，要三篇左右）15.比选方案需要合理设置。
道路毕业设计答辩道路毕业设计答辩篇⼀：问题所有的问题请结合⾃⼰的设计并参考设计规范、⼿册、教材回答：⼀、公路等级及设计车速1、⾃然条件对道路设计有哪些影响，你的设计中是如何考虑的？2、如何确定公路的等级和设计车速？车流量，⾼速公路和⼀级公路20年设计交通量，公路功能等3、⽐选⽅案时所考虑的主要因素？线形，⼟⽯⽅计算以及桥梁隧道等造价⾼低。
以及少穿民房和耕地。
⼆、平⾯设计1、平⾯线形设计中的主要技术控制指标有哪些？缓和曲线最⼩长度直线最⼤长度两缓和曲线相连之间的直线最⼩距离（两⽅⾯）2、你的平⾯线形设计中的主要控制点有哪些？3、缓和曲线的作⽤是什么？确定其长度应考虑哪些因素？更符合车辆⾏驶轨迹根据车速公路等级车道服务⽔平视距4、平⾯线形设计的要点和原则有哪些？三、纵断⾯设计1、纵断⾯设计中的主要技术控制指标有哪些？2、纵断⾯设计中考虑哪些⾼程控制因素？3、简述你的纵断⾯设计的⽅法步骤。
4、纵断⾯线形设计的要点和原则有哪些？四、横断⾯设计1、在横断⾯上标出你的设计标⾼位置，并介绍你的超⾼过渡⽅式（画图⽰意）。
2、你的设计中有加宽吗？什么条件下需要加宽？3、如何确定超⾼？是不是所有的弯道都需要设置超⾼。
五、线形组合1、平纵线性组合的原则及设计要点有哪些？2、线性设计中如何使⽤平、纵线形的相关指标？六、平⾯交叉1、平⾯交叉的线形设计要考虑哪些因素？七、防护1、道路中常见的坡⾯防护措施有哪些？2、挡⼟墙常见形式有哪些，各有何特点？3、沿河路基如何防护？4、如何确定边坡坡率？5、何谓⾼边坡路堤？陡边坡路堤？6、何谓挖⽅⾼边坡？如何增强其稳定性？⼋、排⽔1、公路排⽔设计的注意事项和原则。
2、你设计中地表排⽔组成部分有哪些？九、桥涵1、线形设计与桥隧的配合要考虑哪些因素？2、桥涵的选址要考虑哪些因素？3、桥涵的孔径要考虑哪些因素？4、桥涵的净空要考虑哪些因素？5、设计中如何确定涵底标⾼和涵洞的长度？篇⼆：路设计答辩问题&答案汇总20XX交通⼟建⼯程，公路设计毕业设计答辩应掌握的知识要领⼀、答辩时主要介绍项⽬简介：起⽌点，控制点，影响道路设计的社会及⾃然因素如何做：完成毕业设计步骤和过程，如果⽤软件设计，软件演⽰⼀遍⼆、应掌握的问题（⼀）设计标准1、什么叫⾼速公路？答：⾼速公路指能适应年平均昼夜⼩客车交通量为25000辆以上、专供汽车分道⾼速⾏驶、并全部控制出⼊的公路。
Accident Analysis and PreventionThis paper describes a project undertaken to establish a self-explaining roads (SER) design programmeon existing streets in an urban area. The methodology focussed on developing a process to identifyfunctional road categories and designs based on endemic road characteristics taken from functionalexemplars in the study area. The study area was divided into two sections, one to receive SER treatments designed to maximise visual differences between road categories, and a matched control area to remainuntreated for purposes of comparison. The SER design for local roads included increased landscaping andcommunity islands to limit forward visibility, and removal of road markings to create a visually distinctroad environment. In comparison, roads categorised as collectors received increased delineation, additionof cycle lanes, and improved amenity for pedestrians. Speed data collected 3 months after implementationshowed a significant reduction in vehicle speeds on local roads and increased homogeneity of speeds onboth local and collector roads. The objective speed data, combined with r esidents’ speed choice ratings,indicated that the project was successful in creating two discriminably different road categories.2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.1. Introduction1.1. BackgroundChanging the visual characteristics of roads to influencedriver behaviour has come to be called the self-explaining roads(SER) approach (Theeuwes, 1998; Theeuwes and Godthelp, 1995;Rothengatter, 1999). Sometimes referred to as sustainable safety,as applied in the Netherlands, the logic behind the approach isthe use of road designs that evoke correct expectations and drivingbehaviours from road users (Wegman et al., 2005; Weller etal., 2008). The SER approach focuses on the three key principlesof functionality, homogeneity, and predictability (van Vliet andSchermers, 2000). In practice, functionality requires the creation ofa few well-defined road categories (e.g., through roads, distributorroads, and access roads) and ensuring that the use of a particularroad matches its intended function. Multifunctional roadslead to contradictory design requirements, confusion in the mindsof drivers, and incorrect expectations and inappropriate drivingbehaviour. Clearly defined road categories promote homogeneity intheir use and prevent large differences in vehicle speed, direction,and mass. Finally, predictability, or recognisability, means keepingthe road design and layout within each category as uniform as possibleand clearly differentiated from other categories so that thefunction of a road is easily recognised and will elicit the correctbehaviour from road users. The SER approach has been pursued tothe largest extent in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom but ithas also been of some interest inNewZealand. In 2004, the NationalRoad Safety Committee and the Ministry of Transport articulateda new National Speed Management Initiative which stated “Theemphas is is not just on speed limit enforcement, it includes perceptualmeasures that influence the speed that a driver feels is appropriatefor the section of road upon which they are driving–in effect the ‘selfexplainingroad”’ (New Zealand Ministry of Transport, 2004).In cognitive psychological terms, the SER approach attempts toimprove road safety via two complementary avenues. The first is toidentify and use road designs that afford desirable driver behaviour.Perceptual properties such as road markings, delineated lane width,and roadside objects can function as affordances that serve as builtininstructions and guide driver behaviour, either implicitly orexplicitly (Charlton, 2007a; Elliott et al., 2003; Weller et al., 2008).This work is more or less a direct development of work on perceptualcountermeasures, perceptual cues in the roading environmentthat imply or suggest a particular speed or lane position, eitherattentionally or perceptually (Charlton, 2004, 2007b; Godley et al.,1999).A second aspect of the SER approach is to establish mentalschemata and scripts, memory representations that will allowroad users to easily categorise the type of road on which they are.1.2. Localised speed managementThe traditional approaches to improving speed management,traffic calming and local area traffic management (LATM) havefocussed on treating specific problem locations or “black spots”in response to crash occurrences or complaints from the public(Ewing, 1999). A potential disadvantage of these approaches is thataddressing the problem with localised treatments can lead to are-emergence of the problem at another location nearby. Further,when applied inappropriately, localised approaches may addressthe problem from only one perspective, without considering theimpact on other types of road users or residents. When traffic calmingtreatments rely on physical obstacles such as speed humpsthey can be very unpopular with bothresidents and road users andcan create new problems associated with noise, maintenance, andvandalism (Martens et al., 1997).From an SER perspective, treatments that are highly localizedor idiosyncratic may do more harm than good by adding to themultiplicity of road categories and driver uncertainty, rather thanbuilding driver expectations around a few uniform road types.Instead of considering a single location in isolation, SER roaddesigns are considered within a hierarchy of road functions; e.g.,access roads, collector roads, and arterial roads. Although SERschemes may employ physical design elements used in trafficcalming schemes (e.g., road narrowing with chicanes and accesscontrols) they also employ a range of more visually oriented featuressuch as median and edge line treatments, road markings,pavement surfaces, and roadside furniture. For an effective SERscheme it is important to select the combination of features that will afford the desired driver speeds and to ensure their consistentuse to form distinct categories of road types (van der Horst andKaptein, 1998; Wegman et al., 2005).road category that would meet the three SER principles of functional use, homogeneous use, and predictable use. Herrstedt (2006)reported on the use of a standardised catalogue of treatments compiledfrom researcher and practitioner advice. Goldenbeld and vanSchagen (2007) used a survey technique to determine road characteristicsthat minimise the difference between drivers’ ratingsof preferred speed and perceived safe speed and select road featuresthat make posted speeds “credible”. Aarts and Davidse (2007)used a driving simulator to verify whether the “essential recognisabilitycharacteristics” of different road classes conformed to theexpectations of road users. Weller et al. (2008) employed a range of statistical techniques, including factor analysis and categoricalclustering to establish the road characteristics that drivers use tocategorise different road types.The practical difficulties of implementing an SER system thusbecome a matter of finding answers to a series of questions. Howdoes one create a discriminable road hierarchy for an existingroad network? What road characteristics should be manipulatedto establish category-defining road features? How can SER roadfeatures and selection methods be made relevant and appropriatefor a local context? (Roaddesigns appropriate for The Netherlandswould not be suitable in New Zealand, in spite of its name.) A surveyof national and international expert opinion in order establishcategory-defining road features for New Zealand roads revealedthat the regional character and local topography of roads oftenundercut the usefulness of any standardised catalogue of designcharacteristics (Charlton and Baas, 2006).1.4. Goals of the present projectThe project described in this paper sought to develop anddemonstrate an SER process based on retrofitting existing roadsto establish a clear multi-level road hierarchy with appropriatedesign speeds, ensuring that each level in the hierarchy possesseda different “look and feel”. Rather than transferring SER designs already in use internationally, the project attempted to develop amethod that would build on the features of roads in the local area;extending road characteristics with desirable affordances to otherroads lacking them and creating discriminable road categories inthe process. Of interest was whether such a process could producecost-effective designs and whether those designs would be effectivein creating different road user expectations and distinct speedprofiles for roads of different categories.2. MethodsThe research methodology/SER design process developed forthis project progressed through a series of five stages: (1) selectionof study area; (2) identification of the road hierarchy; (3) analysisof the road features; (4) development of a design template; and (5)implementation and evaluation of the SER treatments. Each of thestages is described in the sections that follow.2.1. Selection of study areaThe study area for this project (Pt England/Glen Innes in Auckland)was selected in consultation with a project steering groupcomprised of representatives from the Ministry of Transport, NewZealand Transport Agency, New Zealand Police, and other localtransport and urban agencies. The study area was an establishedneighbourhood contained amix of private residences, small shops,schools, and churches, and was selected, in part, because of its historyof cyclist, pedestrian and loss of controlcrashes, almost twicethe number。
