Minimizing Shadow Area in Mountain Roads for Improving the Sustainability of Infrastructures

Abstract

The lack of sunlight on mountain roads in the wintertime leads to an increase in accidents. In this paper, a methodology is presented for the use of sunny and shady areas to be included as a parameter in road design. The inclusion of this parameter allows for the design of an iterative method for the projected infrastructures. The parameterization of the road layout facilitates the possibility of applying an iterative process of modifying the geometric elements that constitute it, examining different layout alternatives until a layout is achieved in which the surface area in the shady area is minimized, increasing the road safety and minimizing environmental impact. The methodology has been defined, generating and analyzing the results of the solar lighting study using a file in IFC format capable of integrating with the rest of the design elements (platform, signaling, structures, etc.) and thus obtaining a BIM format which allows the model to be viewed in three dimensions and moves towards 4D and 5D. The model used for the study was a high mountain road located in the province of Teruel (Spain). It is a road section characterized by successive curves in which several traffic accidents have occurred due to running off the road, partly because of the presence of ice on the platform.

Digitalization and Sustainability in Linear Projects Trends: A Bibliometric Analysis

“…Flynn and Traver [72] used LCA to assess the impact of a rain garden on the Villanova University campus. Similarly, Aranda et al [73] investigated how to minimize shadow areas in mountain roads to improve infrastructure sustainability. Tan et al [74] studied how implementing sustainable practices in infrastructure projects can impact business competitiveness.…”

Moving toward sustainability and circularity in hill road construction: a study of barriers, practices and performance

“…Resources, managerial, and regulatory barriers to the implementation of sustainability practices in HRC projects were measured with a 21-item scale adapted from various sources, namelyPitt et al (2009),Serpell et al (2013), Shokri-Ghasabeh and Chileshe (2014),Shang et al (2021), and Fitrian andAjayi (2022). The level of implementation of sustainability practices (i.e., sustainable construction materials, sustainable construction design, modern construction methods, environmental provision and reporting) was measured with a 24-item scale adapted from multiple sources such asTan et al (20211),Armstrong and Davis (2013),Huang et al, (2013),Hearn and Shakya (2018),McGuire and Morrall (2020), andAranda et al (2021). Finally, the sustainable performance of the organization was assessed with a three-dimensional scale comprising six items for the economic dimension adapted fromShi et al (2012),Shen et al (2007),Devkota et al (2019),Pham and Kim (2019), andInti and Tandon (2021), seven items for the environmental dimension fromShi et al (2012),Pham andKim (2019), andTandon (2021), and eight items for the social dimension were adapted formShen et al (2011…”

“…The level of implementation of sustainability practices (i.e. sustainable construction materials, sustainable construction design, modern construction methods, environmental provision and reporting) was measured with a 24-item scale adapted from multiple sources such as Tan et al (2011),Armstrong et al (2013),Huang et al (2013) andAranda et al (2021). Finally, the sustainable performance of the organization was assessed with a threedimensional scale comprising six items for the economic dimension adapted fromShi et al (2012),Shen et al (2007),Devkota et al (2019),Pham and Kim (2019) andInti and Tandon (2021), seven items for the environmental dimension fromShi et al (2012),Pham and Kim (2019) andInti and Tandon (2021), and eight items for the social dimension were adapted fromShen et al (2011…”