CN112464474B - Low-frequency debris flow early warning method based on risk evaluation - Google Patents
Low-frequency debris flow early warning method based on risk evaluation Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN112464474B CN112464474B CN202011350091.3A CN202011350091A CN112464474B CN 112464474 B CN112464474 B CN 112464474B CN 202011350091 A CN202011350091 A CN 202011350091A CN 112464474 B CN112464474 B CN 112464474B
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- debris flow
- risk
- source
- factor
- degree score
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Active
Links
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F30/00—Computer-aided design [CAD]
- G06F30/20—Design optimisation, verification or simulation
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/04—Forecasting or optimisation specially adapted for administrative or management purposes, e.g. linear programming or "cutting stock problem"
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
- G06Q10/0635—Risk analysis of enterprise or organisation activities
Landscapes
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
- Economics (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Strategic Management (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Marketing (AREA)
- Development Economics (AREA)
- Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
- Operations Research (AREA)
- Quality & Reliability (AREA)
- Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
- General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- General Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Geometry (AREA)
- Evolutionary Computation (AREA)
- Computer Hardware Design (AREA)
- Educational Administration (AREA)
- Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)
Abstract
The invention discloses a low-frequency debris flow early warning method based on risk evaluation, which comprises the steps of determining a secondary factor of the risk evaluation of the debris flow through an aerial camera measurement technology and a hydrological manual; determining a main factor of the risk evaluation of the debris flow through ground investigation; determining a risk degree score of the debris flow risk assessment secondary factor and the debris flow risk assessment primary factor; determining the sum of the risk degree scores of the secondary debris flow risk assessment factors and the primary debris flow risk assessment factors as a debris flow risk degree comprehensive score; and early warning is carried out according to the comprehensive score of the risk degree of the debris flow, the current rainfall time and the current accumulated rainfall. According to the method, the comprehensive score of the debris flow risk degree is obtained based on the main debris flow risk evaluation factor and the secondary debris flow risk evaluation factor, and then early warning is carried out according to the comprehensive score of the debris flow risk degree, the current rainfall duration and the current accumulated rainfall, so that the risk early warning suitable for the low-frequency debris flow trench is realized.
Description
Technical Field
The invention relates to a debris flow early warning technology, in particular to a low-frequency debris flow early warning method based on risk evaluation.
Background
Debris flow is a sudden natural disaster in mountainous areas, and is also one of links in global ablation and earth surface remodeling from the viewpoints of dynamic geology and geography-geomorphology. The risk of the debris flow refers to the size of the possibility of being damaged by the debris flow, and is a characteristic of the debris flow itself. The debris flow risk evaluation and early warning are mainly used for pre-disaster evaluation and are important contents in disaster prediction and forecast and disaster reduction and prevention work.
The geomorphology and mathematical geology are widely applied to and researched and made a certain result with the debris flow risk evaluation, but currently, the debris flow risk evaluation usually adopts two main factors of 'one-time maximum flushing amount' and 'occurrence frequency' and eight secondary factors proposed by Liu Xilin, and the weight, grade value and risk score of each evaluation factor are calculated by adopting a gray correlation method based on the existing debris flow disasters in southwest regions of China.
The application of the technical method to northern low-frequency debris flow gully can cause the following problems: (1) the low-frequency debris flow ditch cannot acquire two main factors of 'one-time maximum flushing amount' and 'occurrence frequency' due to no disasters or long-time disasters, etc. in history, however, the ditches have sufficient material sources and proper terrains, and the debris flow can be started under certain rainfall conditions. (2) The weight and grade value of the existing risk evaluation factors are derived based on 37 typical debris flow ditches in Yunnan province in southwest area of China, and if the existing risk evaluation factors are directly applied to the low-frequency debris flow ditches, sample data of the existing risk evaluation factors are lack of representativeness, and weight assignment is unreasonable. (3) The existing debris flow early-warning rainfall model is aimed at the whole area, and the debris flow early-warning rainfall model is not determined according to classification of the underlying surfaces of different geology, namely the debris flow dangerous degree.
Therefore, the establishment of a risk evaluation and early warning system suitable for the low-frequency debris flow trench is a technical problem which needs to be solved urgently at present.
Disclosure of Invention
First, the technical problem to be solved
In order to solve the problems in the prior art, the invention provides a low-frequency debris flow early warning method based on risk evaluation.
(II) technical scheme
In order to achieve the above purpose, the main technical scheme adopted by the invention comprises the following steps:
a low-frequency debris flow early warning method based on risk evaluation comprises the following steps:
s1, determining a secondary factor for risk evaluation of the debris flow through an aerial camera measurement technology and a hydrological manual;
s2, determining a main factor of the debris flow risk evaluation through ground investigation;
s3, determining risk degree scores of the secondary factors for the risk evaluation of the debris flow and the primary factors for the risk evaluation of the debris flow;
s4, determining the sum of the risk degree scores of the secondary debris flow risk evaluation factors and the primary debris flow risk evaluation factors as a debris flow risk degree comprehensive score;
and S5, early warning is carried out according to the comprehensive score of the risk degree of the debris flow, the current rainfall time and the current accumulated rainfall.
Optionally, the secondary factors for evaluating the risk of the debris flow in S1 include: the river basin area S, the relative height difference H, the vegetation coverage rate C, the annual average rainfall A, the upper body average gradient G and the main ditch length L.
Optionally, the S2 includes:
s2-1, determining source amounts of a fourth system flood deposit source, a fourth system collapse source, a fourth system residual slope deposit source and a fourth system artificial deposit source through ground investigation, wherein the source causes of debris flow hidden danger of the fourth system flood deposit source, the fourth system collapse source, the fourth system residual slope deposit source and the fourth system artificial deposit source are different;
s2-2, main factor r=r for debris flow risk assessment Flushing and flooding accumulation +R Collapse of slump +R Residual slope area +R Manual work 。
Wherein R is Flushing and flooding accumulation The material source quantity of the fourth-system flood deposit material source is R Collapse of slump The material source quantity of the fourth-series collapse material source is R Residual slope area The material source quantity of the fourth-series residual slope product source is R Manual work Source amount for the fourth artificial deposit source.
Optionally, the S2-1 includes:
s2-1-1, determining the form and cause of the loose deposit of the debris flow through ground investigation;
s2-1-2, determining the area and thickness of the loose deposit of the debris flow through geophysical exploration and slot exploration;
s2-1-3, dividing the loose sediment of the debris flow into four types according to the form and the cause, wherein the four types are a fourth series of flood sediment source, a fourth series of collapse material source, a fourth series of residual slope sediment source and a fourth series of artificial sediment source respectively;
s2-1-4, determining the respective material source quantity according to the areas and the thicknesses of the debris flow loose deposits in the fourth system flood deposit source, the fourth system collapse material source, the fourth system residual slope deposit source and the fourth system artificial deposit source.
Optionally, the S2-1-4 includes:
fourth series of flood deposit material source quantity R Flushing and flooding accumulation Area of fourth series of flood source=thickness of fourth series of flood source 4.4;
fourth-series collapse material source quantity R Collapse of slump Area of fourth line collapse material source x 3.04 thickness of fourth line collapse material source;
source quantity R of fourth-series residual slope product source Residual slope area Area of fourth line stub source 1.37 thickness of fourth line stub source;
source quantity R of fourth artificial accumulation source Manual work Area of fourth line stub source =thickness of fourth line stub source ×0.49.
Optionally, the S3 includes:
risk degree score B of main factor of debris flow risk evaluation R ＝12R；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor S S ＝4S；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor H H ＝2H；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor C C ＝3C；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor A A ＝6A；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor G G ＝G；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor L L ＝5L。
Optionally, the S3 includes:
risk degree score B of main factor of debris flow risk evaluation R ＝0.36R；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor S S ＝0.12S；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor H H ＝0.06H；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor C C ＝0.09C；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor A A ＝0.18A；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor G G ＝0.03G；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor L L ＝0.15L。
Optionally, the S3 includes:
risk degree score B of main factor of debris flow risk evaluation R ＝12*0.36*R；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor S S ＝4*0.12*S；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor H H ＝2*0.06*H；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor C C ＝3*0.09*C；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor A A ＝6*0.18*A；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor G G ＝0.03G；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor L L ＝5*0.15*L。
Optionally, the S3 includes:
risk degree score B of main factor of debris flow risk evaluation R ＝12*W R * R is R; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor S S ＝4*W S * S, S; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor H H ＝2*W H * H is formed; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor C C ＝3*W C * C, performing operation; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor A A ＝6*W A * A, A is as follows; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor G G ＝W G * G, G; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor L L ＝5*W L *L；
Or alternatively, the process may be performed,
risk degree score B of main factor of debris flow risk evaluation R ＝W R * R is R; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor S S ＝W S * S, S; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor H H ＝W H * H is formed; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor C C ＝W C * C, performing operation; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor A A ＝W A * A, A is as follows; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor G G ＝W G * G, G; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor L L ＝W L *L；
Wherein W is R Risk degree weight for main factor of debris flow risk evaluation, W S Risk degree weight of secondary factor S for risk evaluation of debris flow, W H Evaluating the risk degree weight, W, of the secondary factor H for the risk of the debris flow C Risk degree weight of secondary factor C for risk evaluation of debris flow, W A Risk degree weight of secondary factor A for risk evaluation of debris flow, W G Risk degree weight, W, of secondary factor G for risk evaluation of debris flow L Evaluating the risk degree weight of the secondary factor L for the debris flow risk;
if R is more than or equal to 20, W R =0.36, if 5<R<20, then W R =0.25, if R is less than or equal to 5, W R ＝0.14；
If S is greater than or equal to 5, W S =0.12, if 2<S<5, then W S =0.08, if S is less than or equal to 2, W S ＝0.05；
If H is more than or equal to 800, W H =0.06, if 500<H<800, then W H =0.04, if H is less than or equal to 500, W H ＝0.02；
If C is more than or equal to 70, W C =0.09, if 70<C<80, then W C =0.06, if C is less than or equal to 80, W C ＝0.04；
If A is more than or equal to 600, W A =0.18, if 540<A<600, then W A =0.13, if a is less than or equal to 540, W A ＝0.07；
If G is more than or equal to 35, W G =0.03, if 30<G<35, then W G =0.02, if G is less than or equal to 30, W G ＝0.01；
If L is greater than or equal to 3, W L =0.15, if 2<L<3, then W L =0.11, if L is less than or equal to 2, W L ＝0.06；
R is in square, S is in square kilometer, H is in meter, C is in millimeter, A is in millimeter, G is in degree, and L is in kilometer.
Optionally, the S5 includes:
s5-1, if the comprehensive score of the degree of risk of the debris flow is greater than or equal to 0.8, determining that the risk level is high risk; if the comprehensive score of the degree of risk of the debris flow is more than 0.7 and less than 0.8, determining the risk level as medium risk; if the comprehensive score of the degree of risk of the debris flow is less than or equal to 0.7, determining that the risk level is low risk;
s5-2, determining an early warning coefficient X=current accumulated rainfall/current rainfall duration 0.82 ；
S5-3, if X is less than or equal to 35.4, red early warning is carried out; if X is 35.4< and is less than or equal to 38.9, performing orange early warning when the danger level is high danger, and performing red early warning when the danger level is medium danger; if X is 38.9< and is less than or equal to 42.5, yellow early warning is carried out when the danger level is high, orange early warning is carried out when the danger level is medium, and red early warning is carried out when the danger level is low; if X is 42.5< and is less than or equal to 46, blue early warning is carried out when the danger level is high, yellow early warning is carried out when the danger level is medium danger, and orange early warning is carried out when the danger level is low danger; if the X is 46< 49.6, blue early warning is carried out when the danger level is middle danger, and yellow early warning is carried out when the danger level is low danger; if the X is 49.6< and is less than or equal to 53.1, blue early warning is carried out when the danger level is low.
(III) beneficial effects
According to the method, the comprehensive score of the risk degree of the debris flow is obtained based on the main factor of risk evaluation of the debris flow and the secondary factor of risk evaluation of the debris flow, and then early warning is carried out according to the comprehensive score of the risk degree of the debris flow, the current rainfall time and the current accumulated rainfall, so that the risk early warning suitable for the low-frequency debris flow trench is realized.
Drawings
Fig. 1 is a schematic flow chart of a low-frequency debris flow early warning method based on risk evaluation according to an embodiment of the present invention.
Detailed Description
The invention will be better explained for understanding by referring to the following detailed description of the embodiments in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.
The geomorphology and mathematical geology are widely applied to and researched and made a certain result with the debris flow risk evaluation, but currently, the debris flow risk evaluation usually adopts two main factors of 'one-time maximum flushing amount' and 'occurrence frequency' and eight secondary factors proposed by Liu Xilin, and the weight, grade value and risk score of each evaluation factor are calculated by adopting a gray correlation method based on the existing debris flow disasters in southwest regions of China.
The application of the technical method to northern low-frequency debris flow gully can cause the following problems: (1) the low-frequency debris flow ditch cannot acquire two main factors of 'one-time maximum flushing amount' and 'occurrence frequency' due to no disasters or long-time disasters, etc. in history, however, the ditches have sufficient material sources and proper terrains, and the debris flow can be started under certain rainfall conditions. (2) The weight and grade value of the existing risk evaluation factors are derived based on 37 typical debris flow ditches in Yunnan province in southwest area of China, and if the existing risk evaluation factors are directly applied to the low-frequency debris flow ditches, sample data of the existing risk evaluation factors are lack of representativeness, and weight assignment is unreasonable. (3) The existing debris flow early-warning rainfall model is aimed at the whole area, and the debris flow early-warning rainfall model is not determined according to classification of the underlying surfaces of different geology, namely the debris flow dangerous degree.
Therefore, the establishment of a risk evaluation and early warning system suitable for the low-frequency debris flow trench is a technical problem which needs to be solved urgently at present.
Based on the comprehensive score of the debris flow risk degree is obtained based on the main debris flow risk evaluation factor and the secondary debris flow risk evaluation factor, and then the low-frequency debris flow early warning method based on the comprehensive score of the debris flow risk degree, the current rainfall duration and the current accumulated rainfall is used for early warning, so that the risk early warning suitable for the low-frequency debris flow trench is realized.
Specifically, referring to fig. 1, the implementation process of the low-frequency debris flow early warning method based on the risk evaluation is as follows:
s1, determining a secondary factor for risk evaluation of the debris flow through an aerial image measurement technology and a hydrological manual.
Wherein, the secondary factors for the risk evaluation of the debris flow comprise: the river basin area S, the relative height difference H, the vegetation coverage rate C, the annual average rainfall A, the upper body average gradient G and the main ditch length L.
The debris flow is used as a complex natural geographic process on the earth surface, and the environmental factors influencing the occurrence, development, movement and accumulation of the debris flow are up to more than 70. Different scholars have different factor selections, and Liu Xilin is the most representative factor of the main ditch area, the main ditch length, the maximum relative height difference of the river basin, the cutting density of the river basin, the bending coefficient of the main ditch bed, the length ratio of a silt supplementing section, the maximum rainfall within 24 hours and the mouth density in the river basin are selected as secondary risk factors for the risk evaluation of the debris flow. However, the factors chosen are both accuracy and representativeness, and more importantly, simplicity and practicality. According to the principles and the study foundation of the predecessor, the following adjustment is made on the secondary factors by combining the characteristics of the debris flow gully of the low-frequency city:
(1) the "people mouth density in the river basin" is intended to reflect the adverse actions such as mining, dumping, forest cutting, excessive grazing and the like of human activities to accelerate the formation and development of debris flow, and aiming at low-frequency urban positioning, the human activities such as mining, dumping, grazing and the like are forbidden in recent years, so the factor is deleted in the embodiment.
(2) The "sediment supply section length ratio" refers to the ratio of the sediment section length to the main channel length, reflecting the conditions of channel sand production and material source, and because the low-frequency debris flow channel is basically a debris flow, and the main factor in S2 can directly reflect the condition of material source, the index is not representative enough, and the factor is deleted in this embodiment.
(3) The main channel bending coefficient refers to the ratio of the actual length of the main channel to the linear length thereof, and reflects the difficulty of channel drainage. Because the area of the low-frequency debris flow gully is not large as a whole, the factor is not different from the factor of the typical debris flow gully in southwest area, and the index is not representative enough, and the factor is deleted in the embodiment.
(4) Because the stimulated rainfall of the debris flow in the low-frequency area is strong storm short duration, the rainfall before and after the storm of the debris flow is recorded, is not or very rough, and the average rainfall for many years reflects the general atmospheric rainfall trend of an area and is an important index for measuring the dryness and the humidity of the area, the embodiment takes the average rainfall for many years as the stimulation factor for the risk rating of the debris flow by replacing the maximum rainfall for 24 hours.
(5) The vegetation has the effect of retaining water and soil in the valleys, affecting the sand production and water collection capacity of the debris flow, which generally occurs on the ground surface, or in areas where less vegetation is covered, increasing "vegetation coverage" in this embodiment.
(6) Because the gradient reflects the potential energy of the slope surface of the river basin and the capability of carrying solid matters, in general, the larger the average gradient of the river basin is, the worse the stability of the slope is, the more unfavorable geological phenomena such as collapse and landslide develop, the more sufficient the dynamic condition of the debris flow is, and the average gradient is increased in the embodiment.
(7) Because the 'drainage basin area' is a comprehensive physical quantity for measuring the size of a drainage basin catchment area, other factors such as relative cutting degree, relative height of a ditch bed, and ditch bed ratio drop can be influenced; the relative elevation difference of the river basin reflects the potential energy of the river basin and the capacity of the debris flow to carry solid matters. The larger the relative height difference of the river basin is, the better the stability of the mountain slope is reflected, the better the movement development of blocks such as collapse, landslide and the like is, the faster the converging speed is, and the more sufficient the power condition for generating debris flow is, so the two factors are remained in the embodiment.
In summary, in this embodiment, the secondary factors for risk evaluation of the debris flow include: the river basin area S, the relative height difference H, the vegetation coverage rate C, the annual average rainfall A, the upper body average gradient G, the main ditch length L and 6 indexes are used as secondary factors for evaluating the risk of the debris flow. The river basin area S, the relative height difference H, the vegetation coverage rate C, the upper body average gradient G and the main ditch length L are obtained through an aerial image pick-up measurement technology, and the annual average rainfall A is obtained by searching a water manual of the place where the debris flow ditch is located.
S2, determining a main factor of the debris flow risk evaluation through ground investigation.
Specifically, the implementation process of the step is as follows:
s2-1, determining the source quantity of a fourth system flood deposit source, a fourth system collapse source, a fourth system residual slope deposit source and a fourth system artificial deposit source through ground investigation.
Wherein, the source of debris flow hidden trouble of the fourth series flood deposit source, the fourth series collapse source, the fourth series residual slope deposit source and the fourth series artificial deposit source are different in source cause.
For example, determining the source amounts of a fourth series of flood deposit sources, a fourth series of collapse sources, a fourth series of residual slope deposit sources and a fourth series of artificial deposit sources according to the following processes:
s2-1-1, determining the form and the cause of the loose deposit of the debris flow through ground investigation.
The morphology and the causative type of the object source are determined through high-precision ground investigation of 1:10000.
S2-1-2, determining the area and thickness of the loose deposit of the debris flow through geophysical exploration and slot exploration.
S2-1-3, dividing the loose sediment of the debris flow into four types according to the form and the cause, wherein the four types are a fourth series of flood sediment source, a fourth series of collapse material source, a fourth series of residual slope sediment source and a fourth series of artificial sediment source respectively.
S2-1-4, determining the respective material source quantity according to the areas and the thicknesses of the debris flow loose deposits in the fourth system flood deposit source, the fourth system collapse material source, the fourth system residual slope deposit source and the fourth system artificial deposit source.
Specifically, the source quantity R of the fourth-system flood source Flushing and flooding accumulation Area of fourth series of flood source=thickness of fourth series of flood source 4.4.
Fourth-series collapse material source quantity R Collapse of slump Area of fourth line collapse source x 3.04 thickness of fourth line collapse source.
Source quantity R of fourth-series residual slope product source Residual slope area Area of fourth line stub source =thickness of fourth line stub source ×1.37.
Source quantity R of fourth artificial accumulation source Manual work Area of fourth line stub source =thickness of fourth line stub source ×0.49.
S2-2, main factor r=r for debris flow risk assessment Flushing and flooding accumulation +R Collapse of slump +R Residual slope area +R Manual work 。
Wherein R is Flushing and flooding accumulation The material source quantity of the fourth-system flood deposit material source is R Collapse of slump The material source quantity of the fourth-series collapse material source is R Residual slope area The material source quantity of the fourth-series residual slope product source is R Manual work Source amount for the fourth artificial deposit source.
The primary factor R represents the loose stock.
The debris flow risk assessment is comprehensively judged by debris flow risk factors, and one or more factors playing the leading role are called main risk factors. As is well known, three major factors of debris flow are object source, topography and rainfall, the previous research cannot accurately acquire the accurate object source type and corresponding reserve of a debris flow ditch due to the limitation of investigation precision and means, and the maximum flushing amount of the debris flow is usually calculated once as a main factor according to a formula provided by the debris flow disaster prevention engineering investigation Specification (DZ/T0220-2006). However, the calculation process involves multiple empirical estimates of mud-rock flow duration, blockage factor, runoff factor, etc., and different researchers may not have uniform maximum runoff calculation criteria due to different knowledge experiences.
According to different sources of the hidden danger of the debris flow, the debris flow is divided into four types: fourth system flood deposit source (Q4al+pl), fourth system collapse source (Q4col+del), fourth system residual slope deposit source (Q4dl+el), fourth system artificial deposit source (Q4 ml), determining form and cause type of the material source through high-precision 1:10000 ground investigation, determining thickness and soil body structure of the material source through geophysical investigation and slot detection, calculating material source quantity according to surface form and thickness of the material source, and obtaining material source quantity R=R Flushing and flooding accumulation +R Collapse of slump +R Residual slope area +R Manual work As a main factor in risk assessment.
S3, determining risk degree scores of the secondary debris flow risk assessment factors and the primary debris flow risk assessment factors.
The association sequence formed by the arrangement of the association degree is not changed due to the change of the resolution coefficient, the dimensionless property and the position of the reference point, and the association sequence for determining the secondary factors for the risk evaluation of the debris flow according to the characteristics is as follows: the annual average rainfall A is larger than the length L of the main ditch, the area S of the river basin, the vegetation coverage rate C, the relative height difference H and the upper body average gradient G. Then, starting from the secondary factor with the smallest association degree, the given initial weight is used as a tolerance, the weight is increased from the number of steps to the direction that the association degree is increased, and the weight for evaluating the primary factor is 2 times of the maximum evaluation secondary factor. The weights and weights of the respective evaluation factors are shown in table 1, and the sum of the weights of 7 evaluation factors is equal to 1, wherein the weight of the evaluation primary factor is 36% and the weight of the 6 evaluation secondary factors is 64%.
TABLE 1
Based on table 1, there are various implementation manners of this step, and any implementation manner may be adopted in specific implementation.
For example:
the first implementation mode:
risk degree score B of main factor of debris flow risk evaluation R ＝12R。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor S S ＝4S。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor H H ＝2H。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor C C ＝3C。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor A A ＝6A。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor G G ＝G。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor L L ＝5L。
The second implementation mode:
risk degree score B of main factor of debris flow risk evaluation R ＝0.36R。
Danger of debris flowEvaluation of the risk score B for the Secondary factor S S ＝0.12S。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor H H ＝0.06H。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor C C ＝0.09C。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor A A ＝0.18A。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor G G ＝0.03G。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor L L ＝0.15L。
Third implementation:
risk degree score B of main factor of debris flow risk evaluation R ＝12*0.36*R。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor S S ＝4*0.12*S。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor H H ＝2*0.06*H。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor C C ＝3*0.09*C。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor A A ＝6*0.18*A。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor G G ＝0.03G。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor L L ＝5*0.15*L。
Fourth implementation:
risk degree score B of main factor of debris flow risk evaluation R ＝12*W R *R。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor S S ＝4*W S *S。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor H H ＝2*W H *H。
Risk degree of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor CScore B C ＝3*W C *C。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor A A ＝6*W A *A。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor G G ＝W G *G。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor L L ＝5*W L *L。
Fifth implementation manner:
risk degree score B of main factor of debris flow risk evaluation R ＝W R *R。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor S S ＝W S *S。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor H H ＝W H *H。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor C C ＝W C *C。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor A A ＝W A *A。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor G G ＝W G *G。
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor L L ＝W L *L。
For the fourth implementation manner, or the fifth implementation manner, W R Risk degree weight for main factor of debris flow risk evaluation, W S Risk degree weight of secondary factor S for risk evaluation of debris flow, W H Evaluating the risk degree weight, W, of the secondary factor H for the risk of the debris flow C Risk degree weight of secondary factor C for risk evaluation of debris flow, W A Risk degree weight of secondary factor A for risk evaluation of debris flow, W G Risk degree weight, W, of secondary factor G for risk evaluation of debris flow L And (5) evaluating the risk degree weight of the secondary factor L for the debris flow risk.
The weight values are shown in table 2:
TABLE 2
If R is more than or equal to 20, W R =0.36, if 5<R<20, then W R =0.25, if R is less than or equal to 5, W R ＝0.14。
If S is greater than or equal to 5, W S =0.12, if 2<S<5, then W S =0.08, if S is less than or equal to 2, W S ＝0.05。
If H is more than or equal to 800, W H =0.06, if 500<H<800, then W H =0.04, if H is less than or equal to 500, W H ＝0.02。
If C is less than or equal to 70, W C =0.09, if 70<C<80, then W C =0.06, if C is equal to or greater than 80, W C ＝0.04。
If A is more than or equal to 600, W A =0.18, if 540<A<600, then W A =0.13, if a is less than or equal to 540, W A ＝0.07。
If G is more than or equal to 35, W G =0.03, if 30<G<35, then W G =0.02, if G is less than or equal to 30, W G ＝0.01。
If L is greater than or equal to 3, W L =0.15, if 2<L<3, then W L =0.11, if L is less than or equal to 2, W L ＝0.06。
R is in square, S is in square kilometer, H is in meter, C is in millimeter, A is in millimeter, G is in degree, and L is in kilometer.
In addition, since the types and dimensions of the evaluation factors (the secondary factor for the risk evaluation of the debris flow and the primary factor for the risk evaluation of the debris flow) are different, the unified evaluation factor level and risk standard must be normalized. Each of the evaluation factors may be classified by using a 40% and 80% three-level division method, and a risk score may be given to each of the evaluation factors on the basis of table 1, wherein a high risk factor takes a value of the weight of the evaluation factor, a medium risk factor takes a value of 70% of the weight of the evaluation factor, and a low risk factor takes a value of 30% of the weight of the evaluation factor.
And S4, determining the sum of the risk degree scores of the secondary debris flow risk evaluation factors and the primary debris flow risk evaluation factors as a debris flow risk degree comprehensive score.
Comprehensive score of degree of risk of debris flow b=b R +B S +B H +B C +B A +B G +B L 。
And S5, early warning is carried out according to the comprehensive score of the risk degree of the debris flow and the current rainfall time and the current accumulated rainfall.
In particular, the method comprises the steps of,
s5-1, if the comprehensive score of the degree of risk of the debris flow is greater than or equal to 0.8, determining that the risk level is high risk. And if the comprehensive score of the degree of risk of the debris flow is more than 0.7 and less than 0.8, determining the risk level as medium risk. And if the comprehensive score of the degree of risk of the debris flow is less than or equal to 0.7, determining that the risk level is low risk.
In this step, the dangerous grade is classified into three stages of high, medium and low according to the 0.7 and 0.8 demarcations. As shown in table 3:
TABLE 3 Table 3
| Grade | High risk | Dangerous in | Low risk |
| Risk rating | ≥0.8 | 0.7-0.8 | ≤0.7 |
S5-2, determining an early warning coefficient X=current accumulated rainfall/current rainfall duration 0.82 。
The debris flow prevention and treatment countermeasure comprises three aspects of debris flow prevention and treatment area division, major debris flow prevention and treatment scheme making and debris flow monitoring and early warning system building, wherein investigation and evaluation are the basis, and monitoring and early warning are the core and the foothold. The calculation of rainfall thresholds for long-sequence rainfall and disaster data by using statistical methods, such as 10 minutes, 1 hour, accumulated rainfall and early-stage rainfall, is one of the main means of early-warning and forecasting debris flow, and the step is that the current accumulated rainfall C (mm) -the current rainfall duration D (h) is model C=X.times.D 0.82 Model to make predictions.
Wherein X is an early warning coefficient.
S5-3, early warning is carried out based on the X and the danger level.
Besides the different rainfall forms, duration and short duration intensity when the storm surge excites the debris flow, the storm surge excitation debris flow is closely related to the geological conditions of the underlying surface, such as the loose material source of the debris flow ditch, the terrain height difference and the ground gradient, so that the relation between the early warning grade and the dangerous grade and the adopted C-D model is shown in the table 4:
based on table 4, the early warning scheme is:
if X is less than or equal to 35.4, red early warning is carried out.
If X is 35.4< and is less than or equal to 38.9, orange early warning is carried out when the danger level is high danger, and red early warning is carried out when the danger level is medium danger.
If X is 38.9< and is less than or equal to 42.5, yellow early warning is carried out when the danger level is high, orange early warning is carried out when the danger level is medium, and red early warning is carried out when the danger level is low.
If X is 42.5< 46, blue early warning is carried out when the danger level is high, yellow early warning is carried out when the danger level is medium, and orange early warning is carried out when the danger level is low.
If 46< X is less than or equal to 49.6, blue early warning is carried out when the danger level is medium danger, and yellow early warning is carried out when the danger level is low danger.
If the X is 49.6< and is less than or equal to 53.1, blue early warning is carried out when the danger level is low.
According to the low-frequency debris flow early warning method based on the risk evaluation, aiming at the defects in the prior art, the development characteristics of the low-frequency debris flow gully are mastered in an all-round manner through fine investigation of the debris flow gully, a low-frequency debris flow gully risk evaluation system is scientifically constructed in combination with historical debris flow disasters, an early warning model is built based on the fine investigation and the risk evaluation system, and a foundation is laid for scientific and accurate control of geological disasters.
For example, accurate risk evaluation data are obtained by adopting 1:1 ten thousand precision ground investigation and aerial photogrammetry, so that the data quality is ensured. And screening out risk evaluation factors suitable for the low-frequency debris flow gullies on the basis of the risk evaluation factors, and obtaining factor weights by using typical low-frequency debris flow gullies with history of occurrence of debris flow disasters to form a risk evaluation system. Finally, an early warning method based on a risk evaluation system is provided, so that debris flow early warning can more highlight factors of the pad surface under the geological environment background, and early warning precision is improved.
According to the method provided by the embodiment, the comprehensive score of the risk degree of the debris flow is obtained based on the main factor of the risk evaluation of the debris flow and the secondary factor of the risk evaluation of the debris flow, and then early warning is carried out according to the comprehensive score of the risk degree of the debris flow, the current rainfall duration and the current accumulated rainfall, so that the risk early warning suitable for the low-frequency debris flow ditch is realized.
It will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that embodiments of the present invention may be provided as a method, system, or computer program product. Accordingly, the present invention may take the form of an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment or an embodiment combining software and hardware aspects. Furthermore, the present invention may take the form of a computer program product embodied on one or more computer-usable storage media (including, but not limited to, disk storage, CD-ROM, optical storage, and the like) having computer-usable program code embodied therein.
The present invention is described with reference to flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus (systems) and computer program products according to embodiments of the invention. It will be understood that each flow and/or block of the flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of flows and/or blocks in the flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented by computer program instructions.
It should be noted that in the claims, any reference signs placed between parentheses shall not be construed as limiting the claim. The word "comprising" does not exclude the presence of elements or steps not listed in a claim. The word "a" or "an" preceding an element does not exclude the presence of a plurality of such elements. The invention may be implemented by means of hardware comprising several distinct elements, and by means of a suitably programmed computer. In the claims enumerating several means, several of these means may be embodied by one and the same item of hardware. The use of the terms first, second, third, etc. are for convenience of description only and do not denote any order. These terms may be understood as part of the component name.
Furthermore, it should be noted that in the description of the present specification, the terms "one embodiment," "some embodiments," "example," "specific example," or "some examples," etc., refer to a specific feature, structure, material, or characteristic described in connection with the embodiment or example being included in at least one embodiment or example of the present invention. In this specification, schematic representations of the above terms are not necessarily directed to the same embodiment or example. Furthermore, the particular features, structures, materials, or characteristics described may be combined in any suitable manner in any one or more embodiments or examples. Furthermore, the different embodiments or examples described in this specification and the features of the different embodiments or examples may be combined and combined by those skilled in the art without contradiction.
While preferred embodiments of the present invention have been described, additional variations and modifications in those embodiments may occur to those skilled in the art upon learning the basic inventive concepts. Therefore, the appended claims should be construed to include preferred embodiments and all such variations and modifications as fall within the scope of the invention.
It will be apparent to those skilled in the art that various modifications and variations can be made to the present invention without departing from the spirit or scope of the invention. Thus, the present invention should also include such modifications and variations provided that they come within the scope of the following claims and their equivalents.
Claims (5)
1. The low-frequency debris flow early warning method based on the risk evaluation is applied to the early warning of northern low-frequency debris flow gully and is characterized by comprising the following steps:
s1, determining a secondary factor for risk evaluation of the debris flow through an aerial camera measurement technology and a hydrological manual; the debris flow risk assessment secondary factors include: the river basin area S, the relative height difference H, the vegetation coverage rate C, the annual average rainfall A, the upper body average gradient G and the main ditch length L;
the association sequence of the secondary factors for the risk evaluation of the debris flow is as follows:
annual average rainfall A > main ditch length L > river basin area S > vegetation coverage rate C > relative height difference H > upper body average gradient G;
s2, determining a main factor of the debris flow risk evaluation through ground investigation;
the step S2 comprises the following steps:
s2-1, determining source amounts of a fourth system flood deposit source, a fourth system collapse source, a fourth system residual slope deposit source and a fourth system artificial deposit source through ground investigation, wherein the source causes of debris flow hidden danger of the fourth system flood deposit source, the fourth system collapse source, the fourth system residual slope deposit source and the fourth system artificial deposit source are different;
the S2-1 comprises:
s2-1-1, determining the form and cause of the loose deposit of the debris flow through ground investigation;
s2-1-2, determining the area and thickness of the loose deposit of the debris flow through geophysical exploration and slot exploration;
s2-1-3, dividing the loose sediment of the debris flow into four types according to the form and the cause, wherein the four types are a fourth series of flood sediment source, a fourth series of collapse material source, a fourth series of residual slope sediment source and a fourth series of artificial sediment source respectively;
s2-1-4, determining respective material source quantities according to the areas and thicknesses of the debris flow loose deposits in the fourth system flood deposit source, the fourth system collapse material source, the fourth system residual slope deposit source and the fourth system artificial deposit source;
the S2-1-4 comprises the following steps:
fourth series of flood deposit material source quantity R Flushing and flooding accumulation Area of fourth series of flood source=thickness of fourth series of flood source 4.4;
fourth-series collapse material source quantity R Collapse of slump Area of fourth line collapse material source x 3.04 thickness of fourth line collapse material source;
source quantity R of fourth-series residual slope product source Residual slope area Area of fourth line stub source 1.37 thickness of fourth line stub source;
source quantity R of fourth artificial accumulation source Manual work Area of fourth line residual slope product source x 0.49 thickness of fourth line residual slope product source;
s2-2, main factor r=r for debris flow risk assessment Flushing and flooding accumulation +R Collapse of slump +R Residual slope area +R Manual work ；
Wherein R is Flushing and flooding accumulation The material source quantity of the fourth-system flood deposit material source is R Collapse of slump The material source quantity of the fourth-series collapse material source is R Residual slope area The material source quantity of the fourth-series residual slope product source is R Manual work Source amount for the fourth line artificial heap source;
s3, determining risk degree scores of the secondary factors for the risk evaluation of the debris flow and the primary factors for the risk evaluation of the debris flow;
s4, determining the sum of the risk degree scores of the secondary debris flow risk evaluation factors and the primary debris flow risk evaluation factors as a debris flow risk degree comprehensive score;
and S5, early warning is carried out according to the comprehensive score of the risk degree of the debris flow, the current rainfall time and the current accumulated rainfall.
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein S3 comprises:
risk degree score B of main factor of debris flow risk evaluation R ＝12R；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor S S ＝4S；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor H H ＝2H；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor C C ＝3C；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor A A ＝6A；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor G G ＝G；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor L L ＝5L。
3. The method according to claim 1, wherein S3 comprises:
risk degree score B of main factor of debris flow risk evaluation R ＝0.36R；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor S S ＝0.12S；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor H H ＝0.06H；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor C C ＝0.09C；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor A A ＝0.18A；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor G G ＝0.03G；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor L L ＝0.15L。
4. The method according to claim 1, wherein S3 comprises:
risk degree score B of main factor of debris flow risk evaluation R ＝12*0.36*R；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor S S ＝4*0.12*S；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor H H ＝2*0.06*H；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor C C ＝3*0.09*C；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor A A ＝6*0.18*A；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor G G ＝0.03G；
Risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor L L ＝5*0.15*L。
5. The method according to claim 1, wherein S3 comprises:
risk degree score B of main factor of debris flow risk evaluation R ＝12*W R * R is R; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor S S ＝4*W S * S, S; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor H H ＝2*W H * H is formed; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor C C ＝3*W C * C, performing operation; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor A A ＝6*W A * A, A is as follows; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor G G ＝W G * G, G; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor L L ＝5*W L *L；
Or alternatively, the process may be performed,
risk degree score B of main factor of debris flow risk evaluation R ＝W R * R is R; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor S S ＝W S * S, S; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor H H ＝W H * H is formed; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor C C ＝W C * C, performing operation; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor A A ＝W A * A, A is as follows; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor G G ＝W G * G, G; risk degree score B of debris flow risk assessment secondary factor L L ＝W L *L；
Wherein W is R Risk degree weight for main factor of debris flow risk evaluation, W S Risk degree weight of secondary factor S for risk evaluation of debris flow, W H Evaluating the risk degree weight, W, of the secondary factor H for the risk of the debris flow C Risk degree weight of secondary factor C for risk evaluation of debris flow, W A Risk degree weight of secondary factor A for risk evaluation of debris flow, W G Risk degree weight, W, of secondary factor G for risk evaluation of debris flow L Evaluating the risk degree weight of the secondary factor L for the debris flow risk;
if R is more than or equal to 20, W R =0.36, if 5<R<20, then W R =0.25, if R is less than or equal to 5, W R ＝0.14；
If S is greater than or equal to 5, W S =0.12, if 2<S<5, then W S =0.08, if S is less than or equal to 2, W S ＝0.05；
If H is more than or equal to 800, W H =0.06, if 500<H<800, then W H =0.04, if H is less than or equal to 500, W H ＝0.02；
If C is more than or equal to 70, W C =0.09, if 70<C<80, then W C =0.06, if C is less than or equal to 80, W C ＝0.04；
If A is more than or equal to 600, W A =0.18, if 540<A<600, then W A =0.13, if a is less than or equal to 540, W A ＝0.07；
If G is more than or equal to 35, W G =0.03, if 30<G<35, then W G =0.02, if G is less than or equal to 30, W G ＝0.01；
If L is greater than or equal to 3, W L =0.15, if 2<L<3, then W L =0.11, if L is less than or equal to 2, W L ＝0.06；
R is in square, S is in square kilometer, H is in meter, C is in millimeter, A is in millimeter, G is in degree, and L is in kilometer.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202011350091.3A CN112464474B (en) | 2020-11-26 | 2020-11-26 | Low-frequency debris flow early warning method based on risk evaluation |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202011350091.3A CN112464474B (en) | 2020-11-26 | 2020-11-26 | Low-frequency debris flow early warning method based on risk evaluation |
Publications (2)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN112464474A CN112464474A (en) | 2021-03-09 |
| CN112464474B true CN112464474B (en) | 2023-09-15 |
Family
ID=74808706
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202011350091.3A Active CN112464474B (en) | 2020-11-26 | 2020-11-26 | Low-frequency debris flow early warning method based on risk evaluation |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN112464474B (en) |
Families Citing this family (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN113779491B (en) * | 2021-09-08 | 2023-07-21 | 北京市地质研究所 | Debris flow hidden danger susceptibility analysis method |
Citations (7)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JP2012198886A (en) * | 2011-03-10 | 2012-10-18 | Yamaguchi Univ | Sediment disaster occurring risk evaluation system according to volcanic activity level and program thereof |
| CN107507396A (en) * | 2017-08-09 | 2017-12-22 | 中国科学院、水利部成都山地灾害与环境研究所 | A kind of method for early warning of the dangerous three-dimensional multi-point multi objective of rain-induced landslide |
| CN107545329A (en) * | 2017-09-01 | 2018-01-05 | 成都理工大学 | A kind of Based on Red Bed Debris Flow on Slope Surface forecasting procedure and application |
| CN109447493A (en) * | 2018-11-07 | 2019-03-08 | 成都理工大学 | A kind of Debris Flow Hazard Assessment method after the shake based on material resource activity intensity |
| WO2019073937A1 (en) * | 2017-10-10 | 2019-04-18 | 日本信号株式会社 | Risk evaluation system |
| CN111259608A (en) * | 2020-01-14 | 2020-06-09 | 中国科学院、水利部成都山地灾害与环境研究所 | Debris flow real-time dynamic risk evaluation method |
| CN111733833A (en) * | 2019-03-25 | 2020-10-02 | 中国科学院、水利部成都山地灾害与环境研究所 | Low-frequency debris flow gully identification method based on groove soil body characteristics |
-
2020
- 2020-11-26 CN CN202011350091.3A patent/CN112464474B/en active Active
Patent Citations (7)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JP2012198886A (en) * | 2011-03-10 | 2012-10-18 | Yamaguchi Univ | Sediment disaster occurring risk evaluation system according to volcanic activity level and program thereof |
| CN107507396A (en) * | 2017-08-09 | 2017-12-22 | 中国科学院、水利部成都山地灾害与环境研究所 | A kind of method for early warning of the dangerous three-dimensional multi-point multi objective of rain-induced landslide |
| CN107545329A (en) * | 2017-09-01 | 2018-01-05 | 成都理工大学 | A kind of Based on Red Bed Debris Flow on Slope Surface forecasting procedure and application |
| WO2019073937A1 (en) * | 2017-10-10 | 2019-04-18 | 日本信号株式会社 | Risk evaluation system |
| CN109447493A (en) * | 2018-11-07 | 2019-03-08 | 成都理工大学 | A kind of Debris Flow Hazard Assessment method after the shake based on material resource activity intensity |
| CN111733833A (en) * | 2019-03-25 | 2020-10-02 | 中国科学院、水利部成都山地灾害与环境研究所 | Low-frequency debris flow gully identification method based on groove soil body characteristics |
| CN111259608A (en) * | 2020-01-14 | 2020-06-09 | 中国科学院、水利部成都山地灾害与环境研究所 | Debris flow real-time dynamic risk evaluation method |
Non-Patent Citations (7)
| Title |
|---|
| 丁桂伶等.北京市泥石流易发区降雨预警阈值研究.《水文地质工程地质》.2017,(第03期), * |
| 刘希林.我国泥石流危险度评价研究:回顾与展望.《自然灾害学报》.2002,(第04期), * |
| 刘希林.沟谷泥石流危险度计算公式的由来及其应用实例.《防灾减灾工程学报》.2010,(第03期), * |
| 刘希林等.中国山区沟谷泥石流危险度的定量判定法.《灾害学》.(第02期), * |
| 刘希林等.中国山区沟谷泥石流危险度的定量判定法.《灾害学》.1993,第8卷(第02期), * |
| 张嫱等.北京山区典型低频泥石流特征及危险性研究.《北京林业大学学报》.(第12期), * |
| 张嫱等.北京山区典型低频泥石流特征及危险性研究.《北京林业大学学报》.2015,第37卷(第12期), * |
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| CN112464474A (en) | 2021-03-09 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| Pareta et al. | Quantitative morphometric analysis of a watershed of Yamuna basin, India using ASTER (DEM) data and GIS | |
| Tamene et al. | Reservoir siltation in the semi‐arid highlands of northern Ethiopia: sediment yield–catchment area relationship and a semi‐quantitative approach for predicting sediment yield | |
| Wilkinson et al. | Modelling and testing spatially distributed sediment budgets to relate erosion processes to sediment yields | |
| Dong et al. | The formation and breach of a short-lived landslide dam at Hsiaolin village, Taiwan—part I: post-event reconstruction of dam geometry | |
| Rai et al. | Geospatial approach for quantitative drainage morphometric analysis of varuna river basin, India | |
| Herrero et al. | A handbook on flood hazard mapping methodologies | |
| CN112464474B (en) | Low-frequency debris flow early warning method based on risk evaluation | |
| CN109615195B (en) | Grading evaluation method for hydrological landform of mountain river | |
| Kadam et al. | Geomorphometric characterization and prioritization of watershed from semi-arid region, India for green growth potential | |
| Ali et al. | Sediment flux from Lesser Zab River in Dokan Reservoir: Implications for the sustainability of long‐term water resources in Iraq | |
| Game et al. | Flood modelling for a real-time decision support system of the covered Lower Paillons River, Nice, France | |
| Gellis et al. | Effects of land use on upland erosion, sediment transport, and reservoir sedimentation, Lago Loiza basin, Puerto Rico | |
| Dahiphale et al. | Morphometric analysis of sub-basins in Jaisamand catchment using geographical information system | |
| Randall et al. | Estimation of low-flow statistics at ungaged sites on streams in the Lower Hudson River Basin, New York, from data in geographic information systems | |
| Kaya et al. | Investigation of morphometric and hydrological characteristics of a water basin using numerical models | |
| Nehra et al. | Compounding morphometric parameters for prioritization of vulnerable watersheds for land restoration planning in Beas sub basin using geospatial techniques | |
| Kang | Geospatial analysis of specific degradation in South Korea | |
| Konan | Urban Flood modelling and Floodplain Mapping using ArcGIS, HEC-HMS and HEC-RAS in Abidjan city, Côte D’Ivoire–West Africa: Case study of the watershed of Bonoumin-Rivièra Palmeraie | |
| Ghani et al. | Flood inundation analysis for large scale river using hydrodynamic and sediment transport model–Case study of Sungai Pahang's December 2014 flood | |
| Kolasińska et al. | Long-term variability of runoff from a small agricultural catchment of the North Masovian Lowland | |
| Rosburg | Flow duration curves and sediment yield estimation for urbanizing watersheds | |
| Sixta | Hydraulic modeling and meander migration of the middle Rio Grande, New Mexico | |
| Schiefer et al. | Assessing natural sedimentation patterns and impacts of land use on sediment yield: A Lake-sediment–based approach | |
| Havel | Hydrologic and hydraulic response to wildfires in the upper Cache la Poudre watershed using a SWAT and HEC-RAS model cascade | |
| Suyarto et al. | Hydrological Approach for Flood Overflow Estimation in Buleleng Watershed, Bali. |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| CB02 | Change of applicant information | ||
| CB02 | Change of applicant information |
Address after: 100120 24 Huangsi street, Desheng Gate, Xicheng District, Beijing. Applicant after: Beijing Institute of geological disaster prevention and control Address before: 100120 24 Huangsi street, Desheng Gate, Xicheng District, Beijing. Applicant before: BEIJING INSTITUTE OF GEOLOGY |
|
| CB03 | Change of inventor or designer information | ||
| CB03 | Change of inventor or designer information |
Inventor after: Cheng Suzhen Inventor after: Lu Lu Inventor after: Ma Chao Inventor after: Liu Wenchen Inventor after: Zhang Changmin Inventor after: Meng Huajun Inventor after: Li Junhui Inventor after: Gu Jie Inventor before: Lu Lu Inventor before: Liu Wenchen Inventor before: Zhang Changmin Inventor before: Meng Huajun Inventor before: Ma Chao Inventor before: Li Junhui Inventor before: Cheng Suzhen Inventor before: Gu Jie |
|
| GR01 | Patent grant | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant |