中文核心期刊
CSCD来源期刊
中国科技核心期刊
RCCSE中国核心学术期刊

重庆交通大学学报(自然科学版) ›› 2020, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (10): 54-59.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-0696.2020.10.10

• 桥梁与隧道工程 • 上一篇    下一篇

公路隧道非对称配光照明质量分析

丁浩1,2,刘鹏1,马非2,夏杨于雨2,李钰1   

  1. (1. 重庆交通大学 土木工程学院,重庆 400074; 2. 招商局重庆交通科研设计院 隧道与地下工程分院,重庆 400067)
  • 收稿日期:2019-06-10 修回日期:2019-08-27 出版日期:2020-10-30 发布日期:2020-11-03
  • 作者简介:丁浩(1978—),男,重庆人,研究员,博士,主要从事隧道工程方面的研究。E-mail:694179494@qq.com 通信作者:刘鹏(1992—),男,重庆人,硕士研究生,主要从事隧道工程方面的研究。E-mail:Lpeng928@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家重点研发计划项目(2017YFC0806003)

Lighting Quality of Asymmetric Light Distribution in Highway Tunnels

DING Hao1,2, LIU Peng1, MA Fei2, XIA-Yang Yuyu2, LI Yu1   

  1. (1. College of Civil Engineering, Chongqing Jiaotong University, Chongqing 400074, China; 2. Tunnel and Underground Engineering Branch, China Merchants Chongqing Communications Research & Design Institute Co. Ltd., Chongqing 400067, China)
  • Received:2019-06-10 Revised:2019-08-27 Online:2020-10-30 Published:2020-11-03

摘要: 利用灯具光强在道路纵断面上非对称配光,形成顺、逆光照明和对称照明3种照明类型,以探讨非对称配光在公路隧道中的照明质量问题。研究采用足尺试验与数值仿真相互对比的方法,对3种照明类型在水泥混凝土和沥青混凝土路面上的照明效能进行分析,其中主要照明质量评价指标为路面平均亮度、平均照度、均匀度、STV和TI。研究工况表明:隧道路面为水泥混凝土时,3种照明类型下相差较小,平均亮度相互差值不超过各自值的4.74%,平均照度相互差值不超过各自值的10.2%,均匀度相互差值不超过各自值的5.26%。隧道路面为沥青混凝土时,逆光照明路面平均亮度相比顺光照明和对称照明分别增益了96%和46%;逆光照明时小目标可见度分别是顺光照明的2.6倍和对称照明的1.8倍;逆光照明时阈值增量较高,但仍在可接受的范围内,中间段照明不会对驾驶安全造成较大的负面影响。

关键词: 隧道工程, 隧道照明, 非对称配光, 顺、逆光照明, 试验与仿真, 照明质量

Abstract: By using the light intensity of lamps and lanterns to distribute light asymmetrically on the longitudinal section of the road, three kinds of illumination types, such as forward, backward lighting and symmetrical lighting, were formed to explore the illumination quality of asymmetric light distribution in highway tunnels. The contrast method between full-scale test and numerical simulation was used to analyze the lighting efficiency of three types of lighting on cement concrete and asphalt concrete pavement. The main evaluation indexes of lighting quality were average brightness, average illumination, uniformity, STV and TI of road surface. The research results show that when the tunnel pavement is cement concrete, differences in evaluation indicators for all three types of lighting are small. The average brightness difference does not exceed 4.74% of the respective values, the average illuminance difference does not exceed 10.2% of the respective values, and the uniformity difference does not exceed 5.26% of the respective values. When the tunnel pavement is asphalt concrete, the average brightness of the backlight pavement is 96% and 46% higher than that of the forward lighting and symmetrical lighting respectively; the visibility of small targets in backlighting is 2.6 times higher than that in forward lighting and 1.8 times than that in symmetrical lighting; the threshold increment of backlight illumination is higher, but it is still within the acceptable range, and the middle section lighting will not cause great negative impact on driving safety.

Key words: tunnel engineering, tunnel lighting, asymmetric light distribution, forward and backward lighting, test and simulation, lighting quality

中图分类号: