고속도로 성능향상을 위한 품질성능평가 개선에 관한 연구

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study is to improve the Quality Performance
Evaluation System by supplementing the evaluation system and evaluation
items according to project type to determine the impact on expressway
quality, such as improving the durability of expressways and reducing
defects. The Quality Performance Evaluation was introduced by Korea
Expressway Corporation in 2009 for the purpose of improvement based on
the quantitative scale of the quality management level. Problems arose due
to the application of the same evaluation criteria that did not consider the
project types such as new construction, expansion, and maintenance.
Abstract
The purpose is to improve the evaluation system and evaluation items
suitable for the type of business for improvement. As a result of the
quality performance evaluation analysis, all construction types have
maintained a high quality level of over 90 points since the implementation
of the QPI, and by project type, there is little difference in quality in
earthworks and bridges. was found to be excellent.
Earthworks have good quality control, and cutting and stacking slopes
are superior in quality to new construction and expansion compared to
maintenance. The high quality level Bridges is continuously maintained
with an average QPI score of 98, and the quality of new construction and
expansion is superior to maintenance in all evaluation items except for the
steel bridge film. Concrete pavement has maintained a good quality of 98
points on average for the past 4 years, and the compressive strength and
bubble spacing are relatively superior to those of newly built and expanded
concrete pavements. In addition, although the Asphalt pavement maintains
a good quality level overall, the quality has decreased in some cases where
there is a construction site that involves a large number of traffic
diversions, and the maintenance site has excellent pavement thickness, and
the flatness is newly constructed and maintenance is expanded found to be
superior to It was found that the Tunnels maintains a good quality level
with an average QPI score of 95 or higher.
As for the quality performance improvement measures, earthworks are
cut, check the residual tension of the ground anchor to prevent slope
collapse, draw up a three-dimensional slope status map, evaluate the
Abstract
performance of the slope and check the horizontal bearing capacity of the
guard rail to secure the compaction of the piled slope, measure the
compaction degree of the compaction vulnerable section, and It is necessary
to maintain an appropriate water content. Bridges are required to block
leakage of expansion joints, prevent cracks caused by impact, manage
cracks in consideration of local characteristics, measure bridge flatness, and
measure cracks and damage rates of bridge pavements. Pavers need to
manage joint performance of concrete pavement, minimize grooving
installation, evaluate pavement condition using HPCI of asphalt pavement,
evaluate intermediate layer, and install frost protection layer considering
underground temperature. In tunnel construction, it was found that it was
necessary to install sealant at the joints in lining construction and to
prevent dew condensation in the shaft.
As a result of analyzing the quality performance results by project type
in this study, the quality management of new construction is better
compared to the expansion or maintenance projects, and the introduction of
quality performance evaluation contributed to the development of quality. In
addition, the comparison and analysis of evaluation results on construction
quality is meaningful in itself, and can be used as a benchmark for future
highway projects.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제 1 장 서 론 1
• 1.1 연구배경 1
• 1.2 연구목적 2
• 1.3 연구내용 및 방법 2
• 제 2 장 이론적 배경 4
• 2.1 도로공사 품질 및 유지관리에 관한 연구동향 4
• 2.1.1 도로 품질관리에 관한 연구 4
• 2.1.2 도로 유지관리에 관한 연구 5
• 2.2 국내․외 건설공사 품질관리 현황 7
• 2.2.1 국내 기관의 품질관리 현황 7
• 2.2.2 국내․외 품질관리 동향 14
• 2.3 고속도로 품질성능지수 평가 16
• 2.3.1 개요 16
• 2.3.2 품질성능지수 평가방법 17
• 2.3.3 주요 개정사항 27
• 2.3.4 현장기술자의 QPI평가에 대한 인식조사 30
• 제 3 장 공종별 고속도로 품질성능 평가결과 분석 32
• 3.1 토공 품질성능 평가결과 분석 32
• 3.1.1 개요 32
• 3.1.2 현장조사 결과 33
• 3.1.3 품질성능지수 평가점수 및 평가결과 분석 36
• 3.1.4 토공 주요 하자 현황 44
• 3.2 교량공 품질성능 평가결과 분석 45
• 3.2.1 개요 45
• 3.2.2 현장조사 결과 46
• 3.2.3 품질성능지수 평가점수 및 평가결과 분석 50
• 3.2.4 교량공 주요 하자 현황 63
• 3.3 포장공 품질성능 평가결과 분석 64
• 3.3.1 개요 64
• 3.3.2 현장조사 결과 66
• 3.3.3 품질성능지수 평가점수 및 평가결과 분석 70
• 3.3.4 포장공 주요 하자 현황 97
• 3.4 터널공 품질성능 평가결과 분석 98
• 3.4.1 개요 98
• 3.4.2 현장조사 결과 99
• 3.4.3 품질성능지수 평가점수 및 평가결과 분석 102
• 3.4.4 터널공 주요 하자 현황 115
• 제 4 장 고속도로 품질성능 개선방안 116
• 4.1 개요 116
• 4.2 토공 품질성능 개선방안 116
• 4.3 교량공 품질성능 개선방안 123
• 4.4 포장공 품질성능 개선방안 130
• 4.5 터널공 품질성능 개선방안 137
• 4.6 스마트 기술을 활용한 품질성능 향상방안 139
• 4.7 종합 141
• 제 5 장 결 론 143