Improved Earthwork Allocation Planning for Fuel Consumption and Emissions Reduction in Linear Infrastructure Construction –Case Study Data

R. L. Burdett, E. Kozan

School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Australia

,

Abstract - This document provides data for the case study presented in our recent earthwork planning papers. Some results are also provided in a graphical format using Excel. The block information is too large to be shown and can be requested by the authors as electronic files.

Summary

  • This 7km case study has been created using data from an old road project in Northern Qld (Torbanlea) Australia. (See Main Roads).
  • The data has been altered and part of it has been inverted and appended to increase the length of the problem.
  • Data occurs every 50 metres and there are 144 locations (i.e. 143 sections)
  • With intersection points included there are 172 sections (85 cut and 87 fill).
  • The earthwork volumes are based purely on the longitudinal profiles. The assumption of common elevations across the road width, and no batters or benches has been made.
  • Two waste sites are defined at either end of the project. A single borrow site has been defined at chainage 37000 (i.e. 30 km away).

Figure 1. Longitudinal (x-z) profiles of land and proposed road (& average elevation)

Table 1. Cut and fill data (unit: cubic metres)

Type / Volume
Cut (Suitable) / 255182.72
Cut (Unsuitable) / 42922.28
Total Cut / 298105.00
Total Fill / 295520.00
Total Cut - Total Fill / 2585.00
Cut (Suit) - Total Fill / -40337.28

Table 2. Vehicles specifications

Vehicle / Mass
(kg) / Speed (m/s) / Cross Sectional Area (m^2) / Capacity (m^3) / Power
(kW) / Condition of use
Dozer / 100000 / 4 / 10 / 10 / 700 / <=50m
Scraper / 65000 / 12 / 6 / 20 / 400 / 51 – 1500 m
Truck (On Site) / 70000 / 17 / 10 / 35 / 400 / 1501 – 3000 m
Truck (Off Site) / 70000 / 20 / 10 / 30 / 300 / > 3000m

Table 3. Elevations at specified chainages (unit: metres)

Table 4. Cut and fill volumes (unit: cubic metres. “Volume <0” => Fill, “Volume >0” => Cut)

Table 5. Percentage and volumes of suitable and unsuitable material

Table 6. Percentages of each soil type in each section

Blocks: The terrain was partitioned as shown in the figures below.

Figure: 50 metre length / 1 metre high / 20 metres wide

Figure: 20 metre length / 1 metre high / 20 metres wide

Figure: 10 metre length / 1 metre high / 20 metres wide
Numerical Results – Section Based

Section Model (One soil type): 169 Hauls

Metric: WorkWork =1.03559E+11Distance: 13948.0383

Metric Distance:Work =1.15252E+11Distance: 12667.56

a) Metric: Work (b) Metric - Distance

Figure. One Soil Type - Solutions for different metric

Section Model (Two soil type): 253 hauls

Metric: WorkWork = 2.24727E+11Distance: 26205.95548

Metric Distance:Work = 2.3393E+11Distance: 25204.77

a) Metric: Work (b) Metric - Distance

Figure. Suitable and Unsuitable Soil Type - Solutions for different metric

Section Model (Four soil type): 585 hauls

Metric: WorkWork = 4.92449E+11Distance: 55752.86861

Metric Distance:Work =5.08301E+11Distance: 54024.24