邻近输电塔路堑边坡失稳风险定量评估及加固工程设计优化
详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |
  • 英文篇名:Quantitative risk assessment of the highway cutting slopes in adjacent transmission lines and design optimization for the reinforcement works
  • 作者:林阿娜 ; 王浩 ; 颜斌 ; 戴旭明 ; 胡燮 ; 赵小盘 ; 王晨
  • 英文作者:LIN A'na;WANG Hao;YAN Bin;DAI Xuming;HU Xie;ZHAO Xiaopan;WANG Chen;College of Environment and Resources,Fuzhou University;Geological Engineering Research Center,Fujian Provincial University;China Energy Engineering Group Guangdong Electric Power Design Institute Co.Ltd;Power Transmission Management Institute of Shenzhen Power Supply Bureau Co.Ltd;
  • 关键词:路堑边坡 ; 定量风险评估 ; 风险管理 ; 输电塔
  • 英文关键词:cutting slope;;quantitative risk assessment;;risk management;;transmission tower
  • 中文刊名:ZGDH
  • 英文刊名:The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control
  • 机构:福州大学环境与资源学院岩土与地质工程系;地质工程福建省高校工程研究中心;中国能源建设集团广东省电力设计研究院有限公司;深圳供电局有限公司输电管理所;
  • 出版日期:2019-04-15
  • 出版单位:中国地质灾害与防治学报
  • 年:2019
  • 期:v.30;No.120
  • 基金:福建省自然科学基金(2018J01746);; 南网科技项目(090000KK52160020);; 国网科技项目(XY-2018F03-2-84)
  • 语种:中文;
  • 页:ZGDH201902004
  • 页数:11
  • CN:02
  • ISSN:11-2852/P
  • 分类号:23-33
摘要
基于路堑边坡风险评估及管理技术框架,以龙岩市永定大道K0+855~K1+085路堑边坡为例,开展边坡定量风险评估,对边坡开挖及加固两个典型工况的边坡破坏概率、灾害到达承灾体概率、承灾体时空概率、承灾体易损性、承灾体财产价值等关键参量进行分析及计算,从而实现了上述两个工况边坡潜在风险损失的定量估算和比较,验证了边坡加固工程实施的必要性和有效性。因公路拓宽方案变更需求,对该边坡提出多级锚固和抗滑桩两种优化设计方案,并同样实施了这两个方案的定量风险评估及对比分析,研究表明在边坡设计安全系数基本相当的条件下,多级锚固方案具有较低的破坏概率和较少的潜在财产损失,为优选变更方案。本文研究提出了一套完整的边坡定量风险评估技术方案,并例证了该技术方案可以在设计阶段预测边坡风险状态及估算潜在风险损失,体现了风险防控对策的科学性和前瞻性,实现从源头控制风险的目标。
        Based on the technical framework of risk assessment and management of cutting slopes,the quantitative risk assessment of Longyan Yongding Avenue k0 + 855 ~ k1 + 085 cutting slope was conducted in this study. The key parameters,such as the probabilities of slope failure,and disaster reaching disasterbearing body,and the space-time probability,vulnerability and property value of the disaster-bearing body,were analyzed and calculated under the two typical working-conditions of slope excavation and reinforcement for the purpose of quantitative estimation and comparison of the potential slope risk-loss. It realized that reinforcement projects for slopes are necessary and effective. Due to the widening of the highway,the multistage anchorage and anti-slide pile schemes were proposed,as well as quantitative risk assessment and comparative analysis of these two schemes. The study shows that the multilevel anchorage scheme is the best alternative,since it has lower failure probability and less potential property loss under the condition of same design slope safety-factor. This study puts forward a complete technical scheme of slope quantitative risk assessment which can estimate the slope risk state and potential risk loss in the designing stage,embodying the scientific and forward-looking of risk control countermeasure for the purpose of controlling risk from the source.
引文
[1]王浩,林一夫,梁涛,等.福建山区高速公路路堑高边坡风险分级方法研究[J].工程地质学报,2016,24(4):492-500.WANG Hao,LIN Yifu,LIANG Tao,et al. Risk classification method for high cut slopes of Highway in Mountains of Fujian Province[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology,2016,24(4):492-500.
    [2]吴树仁.滑坡风险评估理论与技术[M].北京:科学出版社,2012.WU Shuren. Theory and technology of landslide risk evaluation[M]. Beijing:Science Press,2012.
    [3]殷坤龙.滑坡灾害风险分析[M].北京:科学出版社,2010.YIN Kunlong. Landslide risk analysis[M]. Beijing:Science Press,2010.
    [4]乔建平,田宏岭,杨宗佶,等.滑坡风险区划理论与实践[M].四川大学出版社,2010.QIAO Jianping,TIAN Hongling,YANG Zongji,et al. Theory and practice of landslide risk regionalization[M]. Sichuan University Press,2010.
    [5] TURNER, K A, SCHUSTER R L. Rockfall:characterization and control[M]. Washington, D.C.:Transportation Research Board,2012:13-173.
    [6] HUNGR O,FLETCHER L,JAKOB M,et al. A system of rock fall and rock slide hazard rating for a railway-geo-hazard[R]. Edmonton, Alberta,Canada,2003:277-283.
    [7]张雷,顾文红,王晓雪,等.高等级公路边坡工程风险因子识别及评估[J].地下空间与工程学报,2007(增刊1):1265-1268+1273.ZHANG Lei,GU Wenhong,WANG Xiaoxue,et al.Risk factors identification and evaluation for slopes in highway engineering[J]. Chinese Journal of Undergound Space and Engineering,2007(S1):1265-1268+1273.
    [8]梁涛,王浩,泮俊,等.公路边坡风险评估软件RASlope的研发与应用[J].中国地质灾害与防治学报,2016,27(1):62-70.LIANG Tao, WANG Hao, PAN Jun, et al.Development and application of software RASlope for highway slope risk assessment[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2016,27(1):62-70.
    [9]吴忠广,申瑞君,万福茂,等.岩质高边坡运营安全风险源辨识方法[J].公路交通科技,2018,35(3):8-15+27.WU Zhongguang,SHEN Ruijun,WAN Fumao,et al.A method for identifying operation safety risk source of rocky high slope[J]. Journal of Highway and Transportation Research and Development,2018,35(3):8-15+27.
    [10]王浩,豆红强,谢永宁,等.路堑边坡全寿命周期风险评估及管理的技术框架[J].岩土力学,2017,38(12):3505-3516.WANG Hao,DOU Hongqiang,XIE Yongning,et al.A technical framework for life cycle risk assessment and management of highway cut slopes[J]. Rock and Soli Mechanics,2017,38(12):3505-3516.
    [11]唐亚明,冯卫,李政国,等.滑坡风险管理综述[J].灾害学,2015,30(1):141-149.TANG Yaming,FENG Wei,LI Zhengguo,et al. An overview of landslide risk management[J]. Journal of Catastrophology,2015,30(1):141-149.
    [12] FELL R, HO K K S, LACASSE S, et al. A framework for landslide risk assessment and management[C]//International Conference on Landslide Risk Management,2005:599-600.
    [13] PRIEST S D,BROWN E T. Probabilistic stability anslysis of variable rock slopes,1983[C]. Trans.Instn. Min. Metall.(Sect. A:Min. industry).
    [14]李侃,巨能攀.基于蒙特卡洛方法的边坡可靠性评价[J].中国地质灾害与防治学报,2014,25(1):23-27.LI kan,JU Nengpan. Reliability evaluation of slope based on montecarlo method[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2014,25(1):23-27.
    [15]康雷闪.重置成本保险:法理基础及制度建构[J].法商研究,2012,29(3):46-55.KANG Leishan. Replacement cost insurance:legal foundation and system constructio[J]. Studies in Law and Business,2012,29(3):46-55.
    [16]潘懋,李铁峰.灾害地质学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2012.PAN Mao, LI Tiefeng. Disaster geology[M].Beijing:Peking University Press,2012.

© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号

地址:北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编:100083

电话:办公室:(+86 10)66554848;文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新:66554700