GPR Services
GPR Road and Highway Survey for Utility Mapping
Road corridors carry more buried services in the shoulder than under the carriageway — and a widening package priced without knowing that carries diversion cost as unquantified exposure.
Where the trouble actually is
Not under the carriageway.In the shoulder.In the median.In the land you are about to take.Decades of utilities were laid alongside roads precisely because it was the easiest available route. Power feeders, water mains, gas transmission, canal siphons and unrecorded legacy telecom all accumulate there, and none of it appears on a road drawing.
Chainage-referenced crossing schedule · Full corridor width · Night working on live carriageways
Quick AnswerMezux Touch carries out GPR road and highway survey across full corridor width — carriageway, shoulder, median and acquisition land — producing a chainage-referenced crossing schedule that a site engineer can work from. Used on widening packages, service road construction and pre-tender utility risk assessment.
Why the survey covers more than the road
A road drawing shows the road. It does not show the power feeder laid along the shoulder in 1994, the irrigation line crossing beneath the median, or the telecom duct installed by an operator who no longer holds the records.
We survey the full corridor width including the land taken for widening, because that is where the findings are and where diversion cost is created. A package priced on carriageway data alone carries the rest as exposure nobody has measured.
What the deliverable actually is
A chainage-referenced crossing schedule listing what crosses, at what depth, at what angle and with what confidence — the format a site engineer works from rather than files. Layered CAD and GIS support it, and unattributed finds are reported as unattributed rather than assigned to a utility on plausibility.
How a road corridor survey runs
Corridor width, not carriageway width
The surveyed band is set from the acquisition boundary rather than the road edge, because shoulder and widening land carry most of what a package needs to know about.
Lane closures as a programme item
Work on live carriageways runs under a traffic management plan with marshalling and tapers priced as their own line. Night working is normal on high-volume sections rather than exceptional.
Radar and electromagnetic together
Both methods run and are reconciled, because a locator misses non-metallic lines and radar alone struggles where several services run parallel and close.
Layer thickness in the same pass
Where specified, the same radar captures bound course thickness and sub-base condition, which replaces coring on a blind grid with a continuous profile.
Referencing findings so they can be found
Every crossing is tied to chainage rather than to a coordinate alone, since that is how a site engineer locates it with a tape on the day.
Nominating points worth exposing
Critical crossings where a strike would stop the works are nominated for physical verification rather than cleared on detection alone.
Schedule first, drawing second
The crossing schedule is the primary output. The CAD and GIS support it rather than the other way round, because a drawing filed in an office prevents nothing at the excavator.
Answering queries during construction
Questions from site during the works are answered against our own data rather than by referring the client back to the drawing.
Where road surveys go wrong at tender stage
Highway utility mapping specifications routinely omit the one thing that matters most: whether road subsurface investigation is included alongside utility detection, or whether the two are separate scopes. Almost always in the specification. A tender asking for utility survey without stating quality level, deliverable format or who carries the trial-hole obligation produces bids that cannot be compared and a deliverable nobody can use.
We help authorities and consultants write that scope, including on packages we do not eventually bid, because a badly specified survey wastes everyone's money including ours.
NCR road corridors we work
A GPR road survey and a GPR highway survey are the same technique at different scales: a municipal road needs the same crossing schedule a national highway does, but corridor width and traffic management differ. Road utility mapping across either is priced from those two rather than from length. Arterials, sector roads and expressway approaches across the capital region are surveyed from our Faridabad base. Ground varies enough between these areas to change what a corridor survey can establish:
GPR survey in Rohini|GPR survey in Dwarka|GPR survey in Saket|GPR survey in Gurugram|GPR survey in Noida|GPR survey in Faridabad|GPR survey in Ghaziabad|GPR survey in Greater Noida
Frequently asked questions
The full corridor including shoulder, median and acquisition land — that is where most findings are, not under the carriageway.
Yes. It is what a site engineer works from. The CAD and GIS support it rather than replacing it.
Where specified, yes — bound course thickness and sub-base condition come from the same radar pass.
Regularly, under a traffic management plan, with night working normal on high-volume sections.
Yes, including on packages we do not bid. A badly specified survey produces incomparable bids.
Pricing a road widening package?
Send the chainage limits — shoulder and acquisition land usually decide the diversion cost.
Get A Quote +91 99100 10209Road and highway GPR survey — scope, format and detailed questions
Road corridor surveys fail for a predictable reason: they are scoped to the road rather than to the corridor. Utilities were laid alongside highways because it was the cheapest route available, and the shoulder, median and widening land carry decades of accumulated servicing that appears on no road drawing.
Why the schedule matters more than the drawing
A CAD file sits in a design office. A chainage-referenced schedule goes in the site engineer's hand and tells him what he will meet at 4+250, at what depth and at what angle. Surveys that produce beautiful drawings and no schedule are surveys whose findings never reach the person operating the machine, which is where the value was supposed to be realised.
What is delivered
A chainage-referenced crossing schedule as the primary output. Layered CAD in your convention and GIS layers for ingestion. Pavement layer thickness and sub-base condition as a separate profile where in scope, with loss-of-support zones reported as void findings rather than pavement data. Confidence stated per feature, unattributed services reported as unattributed, and critical crossings nominated for verification with the reason given.
Beyond the basics
Why does shoulder land carry so much? Because it was the easiest available route for decades of utilities, and none of those installations appear on a road drawing.
Can radar measure pavement thickness? Yes, including interfaces between courses and zones retaining moisture or having lost sub-base support.
How is a highway survey priced? By corridor width, line spacing, access windows and deliverable format. A per-kilometre rate without those four states nothing.
What about crossings under the carriageway? Surveyed from the surface without closure where possible, and nominated for verification where a strike would stop the works.
Do you provide as-built after diversion? Where the diversion is ours, always. Where another party diverts, we can record it before it is covered.
Terms used on this page
Chainage — distance along a route, the reference a site engineer uses to locate a finding. Acquisition land — ground taken for widening, carrying utilities absent from road drawings. Sub-base — the layer beneath bound pavement courses, whose condition governs road performance. Unattributed service — a detected line no owner claims, reported as such rather than assigned. Traffic management plan — the closure and marshalling arrangement, a cost and programme item.
