桥梁与隧道方案全寿命周期费对比研究——以龙潭过江通道为例  

Research on the Comparison of Full Life Cycle Cost for Bridges and Tunnels:Taking Longtan Rivel Crossing Channel as an Example

作　　者：范诚 宁海枫 郭辰 FAN Cheng;NING Haifeng;GUO Chen(China Railway Major Bridge Reconnaissance&Design Institute Group Co.,Ltd,Wuhan 430056,China;Central&South China Municipal Engineering Design and Research Institute Co.,Ltd,Wuhan 430010,China)

机构地区：[1]中铁大桥勘测设计院集团有限公司,湖北武汉430056 [2]中国市政工程中南设计研究总院有限公司,湖北武汉430010

出　　处：《建筑经济》2024年第S01期550-553,共4页Construction Economy

摘　　要：本文通过计算分析形成全寿命周期费用比选图并得出结论:桥梁方案建设期总投资为70.54亿,全寿命周期费用测算值为79.18亿,全寿命周期费用约为建设期总投资的1.12倍。隧道方案建设期总投资为101.16亿,全寿命周期费用测算值119.56亿,全寿命周期费用约为建设期总投资的1.19倍。桥梁方案建设期总投资相比隧道方案节约30.62亿,全寿命周期费用相比隧道方案节约40.85亿。按照全寿命周期费用进行对比,龙潭过江通道应选择投资偏低的桥梁方案。The paper concludes through calculation and analysis that the total investment during the construction period of the bridge scheme is 7.054 billion yuan,with a calculated total life cycle cost of 7.918 billion yuan.The total life cycle cost is approximately 1.12 times the total investment during the construction period.The total investment during the construction period of the tunnel scheme is 10.116 billion yuan,with a calculated total life cycle cost of 11.956 billion yuan,which is approximately 1.19 times the total investment during the construction period.The total investment during the construction period of the bridge scheme is 3.062 billion yuan less than that of the tunnel scheme,and the total life cycle cost is 4.085 billion yuan less than that of the tunnel scheme.According to the comparison of full life cycle costs,the bridge scheme with lower investment should be selected for the Longtan River Crossing Channel.

关 键 词：过江通道 桥梁 隧道 全寿命周期费用 比选图 

分 类 号：TU723.3[建筑科学—建筑技术科学]