CN113469513A - Slope safety risk evaluation method - Google Patents

Slope safety risk evaluation method Download PDF

Info

Publication number
CN113469513A
CN113469513A CN202110699839.9A CN202110699839A CN113469513A CN 113469513 A CN113469513 A CN 113469513A CN 202110699839 A CN202110699839 A CN 202110699839A CN 113469513 A CN113469513 A CN 113469513A
Authority
CN
China
Prior art keywords
evaluation
slope
risk
risk evaluation
evaluated
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.)
Pending
Application number
CN202110699839.9A
Other languages
Chinese (zh)
Inventor
张洪达
杜岩
谢谟文
白云飞
霍磊晨
黄正均
马国星
吴志祥
张晓勇
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
University of Science and Technology Beijing USTB
Original Assignee
University of Science and Technology Beijing USTB
Priority date (The priority date 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 date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by University of Science and Technology Beijing USTB filed Critical University of Science and Technology Beijing USTB
Priority to CN202110699839.9A priority Critical patent/CN113469513A/en
Publication of CN113469513A publication Critical patent/CN113469513A/en
Pending legal-status Critical Current

Links

Images

Classifications

    • 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
    • G06Q10/0639—Performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
    • G06Q10/06393—Score-carding, benchmarking or key performance indicator [KPI] analysis
    • 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
    • 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
    • G06Q50/00—Systems or methods specially adapted for specific business sectors, e.g. utilities or tourism
    • G06Q50/08—Construction

Abstract

The invention provides a slope safety risk evaluation method, and belongs to the field of slope stability evaluation and safety monitoring. The method comprises the following steps: determining risk evaluation grades and evaluation indexes, and determining value ranges of the evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation grades; determining the weight of each evaluation index; determining the comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation level and the risk evaluation level characteristic value of the slope to be evaluated according to the value ranges of the determined evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation levels and the weights of the evaluation indexes; and performing safety risk evaluation on the side slope to be evaluated according to the obtained comprehensive association degree of the side slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation level and the risk evaluation level characteristic value of the side slope to be evaluated. By adopting the method and the device, the safety risk of the small and medium-sized side slopes can be accurately evaluated.

Description

Slope safety risk evaluation method
Technical Field
The invention relates to the field of slope stability evaluation and safety monitoring, in particular to a slope safety risk evaluation method.
Background
Although there are many non-deterministic methods for evaluating the safety risk of the side slope, most of the methods are based on theories established abroad, such as a Monte Carlo method, an accident tree analysis method, a support vector machine and the like, and all of the methods need to be supported by a large data sample, so that the method has problems in application to small and medium-sized side slopes. Aiming at the defects of the research of the domestic original theory method for evaluating the safety risk of the side slope and the technical problems of the application in small and medium side slopes.
Disclosure of Invention
The embodiment of the invention provides a side slope safety risk evaluation method, which can accurately evaluate the safety risk of small and medium-sized side slopes.
The embodiment of the invention provides a slope safety risk evaluation method, which is applied to electronic equipment and comprises the following steps:
determining risk evaluation grades and evaluation indexes, and determining value ranges of the evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation grades;
determining the weight of each evaluation index;
determining the comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation level and the risk evaluation level characteristic value of the slope to be evaluated according to the value ranges of the determined evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation levels and the weights of the evaluation indexes;
and performing safety risk evaluation on the side slope to be evaluated according to the obtained comprehensive association degree of the side slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation level and the risk evaluation level characteristic value of the side slope to be evaluated.
Further, the risk evaluation grade is divided into four grades, namely I grade, II grade, III grade and IV grade, and the corresponding slope risks are as follows in sequence: low risk, medium high risk and high risk.
Further, the evaluation index includes: internal friction angle, cohesion, slope height, slope gradient, non-uniformity coefficient, layer thickness ratio, rainfall intensity and site temperature.
Further, the determining each evaluation index weight includes:
calculating the weight of each evaluation index by adopting a comprehensive weight method combining subjective and objective weights;
wherein the weight λ of the ith evaluation indexiExpressed as:
Figure BDA0003129363440000021
wherein alpha isiIs a subjective weight, betaiFor objective weighting, n represents the number of evaluation indexes.
Further, objective weight βiExpressed as:
Figure BDA0003129363440000022
Figure BDA0003129363440000023
Figure BDA0003129363440000024
wherein E isiAn entropy value representing an ith evaluation index, m represents the number of risk evaluation levels,
Figure BDA0003129363440000025
is normalized by aij，aijA function value representing the association of the ith evaluation index with respect to the jth risk evaluation level, PijAnd (3) the specific gravity of the ith evaluation index at the jth risk evaluation level.
Further, the determining the comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation level and the risk evaluation level characteristic value of the slope to be evaluated according to the value ranges of the determined evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation levels and the weights of the evaluation indexes comprises:
determining slope object elements to be evaluated, and calculating single evaluation index association degree by using an association function according to the determined slope object elements to be evaluated and the value ranges of all evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation levels;
determining the comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation level according to the obtained single evaluation index association degree and each evaluation index weight;
and determining the variable characteristic value of each risk evaluation grade of the slope to be evaluated according to the determined comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation grade.
Further, the determining slope object elements to be evaluated, and calculating the single evaluation index association degree by using the association function according to the determined slope object elements to be evaluated and the value ranges of the evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation levels includes:
according to the value ranges of the determined evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation grades, the classical domain matter element R is determinedjAnd a domain-saving matter element Rp(ii) a Wherein the content of the first and second substances,
classical domain matter element RjExpressed as:
Figure BDA0003129363440000031
wherein N isjRepresent four risk assessment ratings, grade I-IV, with j being 1, 2, 3, 4, ci8 evaluation indexes of the slope are shown, i is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, vji＝<aji，bji>Indicates the evaluation index ciAt each risk evaluation level NjThe following value ranges;
node domain matter element RpExpressed as:
Figure BDA0003129363440000032
wherein P represents the overall risk assessment scale, vpi＝<api，bpi>Indicates the evaluation index ciValue ranges under all risk evaluation levels;
determining a slope matter element R to be evaluatedx：
Figure BDA0003129363440000033
Wherein, PxIndicating the side slope to be evaluated, xiIs PxRegarding the evaluation index ciActual value of (2);
according to the determined classical domain matter element RjRegion-saving matter element RpAnd the slope object element R to be evaluatedxDetermining the extension distance of each evaluation index relative to each risk evaluation grade;
and calculating the association degree of the single evaluation index by using an association function according to the determined extension distance of each evaluation index relative to each risk evaluation grade.
Further, if the risk evaluation grade belongs to grade II or grade III, the actual value x of the ith evaluation indexiExtension ρ (x) for jth risk assessment leveli，Xji) Expressed as:
Figure BDA0003129363440000034
if the risk evaluation grade belongs to grade I or grade IV, the actual value x of the ith evaluation indexiExtension ρ (x) for jth risk assessment leveli，Xji) Expressed as:
Figure BDA0003129363440000041
wherein, XjiDenotes the ith evaluation index with respect to the jth risk evaluation level section, Xji＝<aji，bji>，X1、X4The risk evaluation levels are represented as class I and class IV intervals.
Further, the single evaluation index association degree is expressed as:
Figure BDA0003129363440000042
Figure BDA0003129363440000043
Figure BDA0003129363440000044
ρ(Xji)＝|bji-aji|
wherein, Kj(xi) A correlation function representing the ith evaluation index with respect to the jth risk evaluation level, X represents the entire section of the ith evaluation index, api、bpiUpper and lower limits respectively representing all the sections of the ith evaluation index;
the overall relevance is expressed as:
Figure BDA0003129363440000045
wherein, Kj(Px) And representing the comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under the jth risk evaluation level.
Further, the variable characteristic value of each risk evaluation grade of the slope to be evaluated is represented as:
Figure BDA0003129363440000046
Figure BDA0003129363440000047
wherein j is*Representing the risk evaluation grade variable characteristic value, min and max respectively representing the minimum value and the maximum value,
Figure BDA0003129363440000048
and the normalized numerical value represents the comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under the jth risk evaluation level.
The technical scheme provided by the embodiment of the invention has the beneficial effects that at least:
in the embodiment of the invention, risk evaluation grades and evaluation indexes are determined, and the value ranges of the evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation grades are determined; determining the weight of each evaluation index; determining the comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation level and the risk evaluation level characteristic value of the slope to be evaluated according to the value ranges of the determined evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation levels and the weights of the evaluation indexes; and performing safety risk evaluation on the side slope to be evaluated according to the obtained comprehensive association degree of the side slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation level and the risk evaluation level characteristic value of the side slope to be evaluated. Therefore, various risk factors (namely, evaluation indexes) influencing the stability of the side slope are comprehensively considered, the safety risk evaluation method suitable for the small and medium-sized side slopes is established, the safety risk of the small and medium-sized side slopes can be accurately evaluated, and the comprehensive evaluation of the safety evaluation indexes such as the mine side slope can be realized.
Drawings
In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention, the drawings needed to be used in the description of the embodiments will be briefly introduced below, and it is obvious that the drawings in the following description are only some embodiments of the present invention, and it is obvious for those skilled in the art to obtain other drawings based on these drawings without creative efforts.
Fig. 1 is a schematic flow chart of a method for evaluating a safety risk of a side slope according to an embodiment of the present invention;
fig. 2 is a schematic diagram of a risk assessment index system provided by an embodiment of the present invention.
Detailed Description
In order to make the objects, technical solutions and advantages of the present invention more apparent, embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings.
As shown in fig. 1, an embodiment of the present invention provides a slope safety risk evaluation method, including:
s101, determining risk evaluation grades and evaluation indexes, and determining value ranges of the evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation grades;
s102, determining the weight of each evaluation index;
s103, determining the comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation level and the risk evaluation level characteristic value of the slope to be evaluated according to the value ranges of the determined evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation levels and the weights of the evaluation indexes;
and S104, performing safety risk evaluation on the side slope to be evaluated according to the obtained comprehensive association degree of the side slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation level and the risk evaluation level characteristic value of the side slope to be evaluated.
According to the slope safety risk evaluation method disclosed by the embodiment of the invention, risk evaluation grades and evaluation indexes are determined, and the value ranges of the evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation grades are determined; determining the weight of each evaluation index; determining the comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation level and the risk evaluation level characteristic value of the slope to be evaluated according to the value ranges of the determined evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation levels and the weights of the evaluation indexes; and performing safety risk evaluation on the side slope to be evaluated according to the obtained comprehensive association degree of the side slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation level and the risk evaluation level characteristic value of the side slope to be evaluated. Therefore, various risk factors (namely, evaluation indexes) influencing the stability of the side slope are comprehensively considered, the safety risk evaluation method suitable for the small and medium-sized side slopes is established, the safety risk of the small and medium-sized side slopes can be accurately evaluated, and the comprehensive evaluation of the safety evaluation indexes such as the mine side slope can be realized.
In a specific embodiment of the foregoing slope safety risk evaluation method, further, the risk evaluation grades are divided into four grades, i.e., grade I, grade II, grade III, and grade IV, and the corresponding slope risks are: low risk, medium high risk and high risk.
In this embodiment, with reference to the risk classification management and control principle, the slope risk evaluation levels (for example, the slope instability risk scores are four levels, i.e., I level (green), II level (blue), III level (yellow), and IV level (red), and the slope instability risks correspond to low risk, medium-high risk, and high risk in sequence.
In a specific embodiment of the foregoing slope safety risk assessment method, the assessment index further includes: internal friction angle, cohesion, slope height, slope gradient, non-uniformity coefficient, layer thickness ratio, rainfall intensity and site temperature.
In this embodiment, from the internal factors and the external factors, 8 evaluation indexes, i.e., an internal friction angle, an adhesive force, a slope height, a slope gradient, an uneven coefficient, a layer thickness ratio, a rainfall intensity, and a site temperature, are respectively selected to establish a risk evaluation index system, as shown in fig. 2.
In this embodiment, the value ranges of the evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation levels are determined by comprehensively considering the risk factors (i.e., the above 8 evaluation indexes) affecting the stability of the slope, as shown in table 1.
TABLE 1 value ranges of evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation grades
Evaluation index Class I Stage II Class III IV stage
Internal angle of friction/° [38,50] [31,38) [27,31) [0,27)
cohesion/Kpa [40,80] [16,40) [8,16) [0,8)
Side slope height-m [0,43) [43,98) [98,144) [144,200]
Slope gradient/° [0,33) [33,40) [40,46) [46,60]
Coefficient of non-uniformity [11,20] [6,11) [4,6) [1,4)
Layer thickness ratio [1/2，3/4) [3/4，9/10) [9/10，19/20) [19/20，1)
Intensity of rainfall-mm [0,25) [25,50) [50,100) [100,150)
Site temperature/. degree.C [0,30) [30,50) [50,90) [90,300)
In a specific embodiment of the foregoing slope safety risk assessment method, further determining each evaluation index weight includes:
calculating the weight of each evaluation index by adopting a comprehensive weight method combining subjective and objective weights;
wherein the weight λ of the ith evaluation indexiExpressed as:
Figure BDA0003129363440000071
wherein alpha isiIs a subjective weight, betaiFor objective weighting, n represents the number of evaluation indexes.
In this embodiment, the subjective weight α may be calculated by an analytic hierarchy processiSpecifically, the method comprises the following steps:
according to the 8 evaluation indexes of the internal friction angle, the cohesive force, the slope height, the slope gradient, the uneven coefficient, the layer thickness ratio, the rainfall intensity and the site temperature determined above and the index importance sequence thereof, a judgment matrix R is firstly establishedn×nAs shown in table 2.
TABLE 2 decision matrix
Evaluation index Internal friction angle Cohesion force Height Slope of slope Coefficient of non-uniformity Layer thickness ratio Intensity of rainfall Temperature of field
Internal friction angle 1 1/2 3 2 5 4 2 3
Cohesion force 2 1 4 3 6 5 3 4
Height 1/3 1/4 1 1/3 3 2 1/2 1
Slope of slope 1/2 1/3 3 1 4 3 1 2
Coefficient of non-uniformity 1/5 1/6 1/3 1/4 1 1/2 1/4 1/3
Layer thickness ratio 1/4 1/5 1/2 1/3 2 1 1/3 1/2
Intensity of rainfall 1/2 1/3 2 1 4 3 1 2
Temperature of field 1/3 1/4 1 1/2 3 2 1/2 1
Based on the obtained judgment matrix Rn×nThe subjective weights of 8 evaluation indexes of the internal friction angle, the cohesive force, the slope height, the slope gradient, the uneven coefficient, the layer thickness ratio, the rainfall intensity and the site temperature are respectively 0.2045, 0.3080, 0.0723, 0.1349, 0.0321, 0.0471, 0.1261 and 0.0751 through the calculation of an analytic hierarchy process.
In this embodiment, the entropy method may be used to calculate the objective weight βiThe method specifically comprises the following steps:
when introducing conditional information entropy into attribute importance and weight analysis, first of all, it is necessary toEstablishing a judgment matrix Rm×nThen, the judgment matrix R is pairedm×nNormalization processing is carried out, m represents the number of risk evaluation grades, wherein the cohesion, the internal friction angle and the uneven coefficient are normalized according to an expression (2), other evaluation indexes are normalized according to an expression (3), and the expressions (2) and (3) are as follows:
Figure BDA0003129363440000072
Figure BDA0003129363440000081
wherein, i is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, j is 1, 2, 3, 4, aijThe value of the correlation function for the ith evaluation index with respect to the jth risk evaluation level, i.e. aij＝Kj(xi)，Kj(xi) Value x representing the ith evaluation indexiWith respect to the correlation function for the jth risk assessment level,
Figure BDA0003129363440000082
is normalized by aij，
Figure BDA0003129363440000083
The maximum value and the minimum value of the correlation function value of the ith evaluation index relative to the jth risk evaluation level are respectively.
Calculating an evaluation index entropy value E according to the formula (4)i：
Figure BDA0003129363440000084
Figure BDA0003129363440000085
Wherein E isiEntropy, P, representing the i-th evaluation indexijIndicates that the ith evaluation index isSpecific gravity at the jth risk assessment scale;
if PijIs 0, is guaranteed lnPijThe meaningful correction is made as per equation (6):
Figure BDA0003129363440000086
further, objective weights of 8 evaluation indexes can be calculated according to equation (7):
Figure BDA0003129363440000087
in a specific embodiment of the slope safety risk evaluation method, further, the determining, according to the value ranges of the determined evaluation indexes at different risk evaluation levels and the weights of the evaluation indexes, the comprehensive association of the slope to be evaluated at each risk evaluation level and the risk evaluation level characteristic value of the slope to be evaluated includes:
a1, determining slope object elements to be evaluated, and calculating single evaluation index association degree by using an association function according to the determined slope object elements to be evaluated and the value ranges of all evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation levels; the method specifically comprises the following steps:
a11, determining classical domain matter element R according to the value ranges of the determined evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation gradesjAnd a domain-saving matter element Rp(ii) a Wherein the content of the first and second substances,
classical domain matter element RjExpressed as:
Figure BDA0003129363440000091
wherein N isjRepresent four risk assessment ratings, grade I-IV, with j being 1, 2, 3, 4, ci8 evaluation indexes of the slope are shown, i is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, vji＝<aji，bji>Indicates the evaluation index ciAt each risk evaluation level NjThe following value ranges;
node domain matter element RpExpressed as:
Figure BDA0003129363440000092
wherein P represents the overall risk assessment scale, vpi＝<api，bpi>Indicates the evaluation index ciValue ranges under all risk evaluation levels;
a12, determining the object element R of the side slope to be evaluated (called as evaluation object element for short)x：
Figure BDA0003129363440000093
Wherein, PxIndicating the side slope to be evaluated, xiIs PxRegarding the evaluation index ciActual value of (2);
a13, according to the determined classical domain element RjRegion-saving matter element RpAnd the slope object element R to be evaluatedxDetermining the extension distance of each evaluation index relative to each risk evaluation grade;
in this embodiment, if the risk evaluation level belongs to level II or level III, that is, j is 2 or 3, the actual value x of the ith evaluation index is obtainediExtension ρ (x) for jth risk assessment leveli，Xji) Expressed as:
Figure BDA0003129363440000094
if the risk evaluation grade belongs to grade I or IV, i.e. j is 1 or 4, the actual value x of the ith evaluation indexiExtension ρ (x) for jth risk assessment leveli，Xji) Expressed as:
Figure BDA0003129363440000101
wherein, XjiDenotes the ith evaluation index with respect to the jth risk evaluation level section, Xji＝<aji，bji>，X1、X4The risk evaluation levels are represented as class I and class IV intervals.
And A14, calculating the association degree of the single evaluation index by using an association function according to the determined extension distance of each evaluation index on each risk evaluation level.
In the present embodiment, the single evaluation index relevance is expressed as
Figure BDA0003129363440000102
Figure BDA0003129363440000103
Figure BDA0003129363440000104
ρ(Xji)＝|bji-aji| (16)
Wherein, Kj(xi) A correlation function representing the ith evaluation index with respect to the jth risk evaluation level, X represents the entire section of the ith evaluation index, api、bpiThe upper limit and the lower limit of the entire section of the i-th evaluation index are indicated.
A2, determining the comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation level according to the obtained single evaluation index association degree and each evaluation index weight;
in this embodiment, the comprehensive association degree is expressed as:
Figure BDA0003129363440000105
wherein, Kj(Px) Showing the slope to be evaluated under the jth risk evaluation levelAnd (5) integrating the association degree.
And A3, determining each risk evaluation grade variable characteristic value of the slope to be evaluated according to the determined comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation grade.
In this embodiment, the variable characteristic value of each risk evaluation level of the slope to be evaluated is represented as:
Figure BDA0003129363440000106
Figure BDA0003129363440000111
wherein j is*Representing the risk evaluation grade variable characteristic value, min and max respectively representing the minimum value and the maximum value,
Figure BDA0003129363440000112
and the normalized numerical value represents the comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under the jth risk evaluation level.
In this embodiment, according to the obtained comprehensive association degree of the side slope to be evaluated at each risk evaluation level and the risk evaluation level characteristic value of the side slope to be evaluated, performing security risk evaluation on the side slope to be evaluated, specifically:
judging the risk evaluation grade according to the comprehensive relevance degree, if Kj(Rk)＝maxKj(Rk) Then, the side slope R is to be evaluatedkThe corresponding risk evaluation grade is j;
and when the risk evaluation grade characteristic value is increased, indicating that the slope instability risk is increased, otherwise, indicating that the slope instability risk is reduced.
In order to verify the effectiveness of the slope safety risk evaluation method provided by the embodiment of the invention, the case of selecting the gangue slope of the coal mine of the Wangjialing mountain of inner Mongolia is taken, the area of the slope belongs to the warm zone semiarid continental monsoon climate, the highest temperature is 42.5 ℃, and the lowest temperature is-19.9 ℃. The annual average rainfall is 496.7mm, the maximum rainfall intensity is 122.9mm, and the rainfall is mostly concentrated in 7-9 months. The selected slope height is 60m, and the slope gradient is 26.6 degrees. The internal friction angle was determined by laboratory tests to be 30.54 °, the cohesion 6.48kPa, the non-uniformity coefficient 16, and the layer thickness ratio of gangue to soil was 10/11. Through on-site monitoring, 2 working conditions of 7 months, 7 days and 8 months, 14 days are respectively selected for analysis, and the table 3 shows risk evaluation index values under two working conditions.
TABLE 3 Risk assessment index values under two conditions
Evaluation index 2018/7/7 2018/8/14
Internal angle of friction/° 30.54 30.54
cohesion/Kpa 6.48 6.48
Side slope height-m 60 60
Slope gradient/° 26.6 26.6
Coefficient of non-uniformity 16 16
Layer thickness ratio 10/11 10/11
Intensity of rainfall-mm 0 41
Field temperature/° c 63.79 51.58
After the slope evaluation index and the risk evaluation grade corresponding table are normalized, the classical domains R corresponding to the risk evaluation grades I, II, III and IV1、R2、R3、R4Respectively as follows:
Figure BDA0003129363440000121
Figure BDA0003129363440000122
Figure BDA0003129363440000123
Figure BDA0003129363440000124
slope object element R to be evaluated corresponding to 2 working conditionsx1、Rx2Respectively as follows:
Figure BDA0003129363440000125
Figure BDA0003129363440000131
the evaluation index weights are obtained from the formula (1), and are shown in table 4.
TABLE 4 evaluation index weights
Evaluation index weight 2020/7/7 2020/8/14
C1 0.0994 0.1440
C2 0.1875 0.2717
C3 0.0632 0.0916
C4 0.1454 0.2107
C5 0.0602 0.0872
C6 0.0180 0.0261
C7 0.3161 0.1230
C8 0.1103 0.0458
The risk evaluation level variable characteristic values and the risk evaluation level calculation results are shown in table 5. As can be seen from table 5, the risk evaluation level from 7/2020 to 24/8/2020 was increased from level I to level II, and the low risk was changed to the medium-low risk; the risk evaluation grade variable characteristic value is increased to 2.263 from the original 1.284, the risk evaluation grade variable characteristic value is biased to II grade, and the precaution work needs to be strengthened. And the field stability evaluation result is consistent with the field survey analysis result. Based on the field application case, the risk evaluation model can dynamically evaluate the risk evaluation level of the slope and the variable characteristic value of the risk evaluation level by analyzing the real-time monitoring data, and provides reliable technical support for a field engineer to more accurately master the instability risk of the slope.
TABLE 5 Risk evaluation level variable eigenvalues and risk evaluation level calculation results
Date of monitoring 2020/7/7 2020/8/14
j* 1.284 2.263
Risk assessment rating I II
TABLE 6 comprehensive evaluation results of risks of different engineering cases
Engineering case Coefficient of stability Characteristic value of risk evaluation grade Risk assessment rating
Middle beam mountain side slope 1.293 1.464 Low risk
Wild goose side slope 1.31 1.116 Low risk
Tun blue side slope 0.927 3.402 High and high risk
Master Tian side slope 1.203 1.961 Low to medium risk
Southern tung side slope 1.079 1.788 Low to medium risk
Table 6 shows the results of the comprehensive risk assessment for different engineering cases. As can be seen from table 6, the method is used in combination with the conventional stability evaluation technology, so that the comprehensive consideration based on stability and risk evaluation can be realized, and further technical support is provided for better scientific risk management and control of small and medium-sized slopes.
In summary, the embodiment of the invention comprehensively considers 8 evaluation indexes influencing slope stability by applying an extension theory, and establishes a new slope safety risk evaluation method on the basis. The method not only considers the actual monitoring data of rainfall, temperature and the like on site to carry out instability probability analysis, but also does not need large sample training and complex numerical simulation calculation, so that the method can be effectively applied to the risk management of various small and medium-sized slopes. In addition, as the method comprehensively analyzes monitoring data such as on-site rainfall and the like, the method can be used for analyzing the real-time monitoring data in the slope safety monitoring, make up for the defect of excessive subjective qualitative conclusions of engineering monitoring report conclusions, and change the current situation of 'heavy acquisition and light analysis' of the slope engineering safety monitoring at present.
The above description is only for the purpose of illustrating the preferred embodiments of the present invention and is not to be construed as limiting the invention, and any modifications, equivalents, improvements and the like that fall within the spirit and principle of the present invention are intended to be included therein.

Claims (10)

1. A slope safety risk evaluation method is characterized by comprising the following steps:
determining risk evaluation grades and evaluation indexes, and determining value ranges of the evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation grades;
determining the weight of each evaluation index;
determining the comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation level and the risk evaluation level characteristic value of the slope to be evaluated according to the value ranges of the determined evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation levels and the weights of the evaluation indexes;
and performing safety risk evaluation on the side slope to be evaluated according to the obtained comprehensive association degree of the side slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation level and the risk evaluation level characteristic value of the side slope to be evaluated.
2. The slope safety risk evaluation method according to claim 1, wherein the risk evaluation grades are divided into four grades, i.e. grade I, grade II, grade III and grade IV, and the corresponding slope risks are: low risk, medium high risk and high risk.
3. The slope safety risk evaluation method according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation index includes: internal friction angle, cohesion, slope height, slope gradient, non-uniformity coefficient, layer thickness ratio, rainfall intensity and site temperature.
4. The slope safety risk evaluation method according to claim 1, wherein the determining each evaluation index weight comprises:
calculating the weight of each evaluation index by adopting a comprehensive weight method combining subjective and objective weights;
wherein the weight λ of the ith evaluation indexiExpressed as:
Figure FDA0003129363430000011
wherein alpha isiIs a subjective weight, betaiFor objective weighting, n represents the number of evaluation indexes.
5. The slope safety risk assessment method according to claim 4, wherein the objective weight β isiExpressed as:
Figure FDA0003129363430000012
Figure FDA0003129363430000021
Figure FDA0003129363430000022
wherein E isiAn entropy value representing an ith evaluation index, m represents the number of risk evaluation levels,
Figure FDA0003129363430000023
is normalized by aij，aijA function value representing the association of the ith evaluation index with respect to the jth risk evaluation level, PijAnd (3) the specific gravity of the ith evaluation index at the jth risk evaluation level.
6. The slope safety risk evaluation method according to claim 1, wherein the determining of the comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated at each risk evaluation level and the risk evaluation level characteristic value of the slope to be evaluated according to the value ranges and the evaluation index weights of the determined evaluation indexes at different risk evaluation levels comprises:
determining slope object elements to be evaluated, and calculating single evaluation index association degree by using an association function according to the determined slope object elements to be evaluated and the value ranges of all evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation levels;
determining the comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation level according to the obtained single evaluation index association degree and each evaluation index weight;
and determining the variable characteristic value of each risk evaluation grade of the slope to be evaluated according to the determined comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under each risk evaluation grade.
7. The slope safety risk evaluation method according to claim 6, wherein the determining of slope object elements to be evaluated and the calculating of the single evaluation index relevance degree by using the relevance function according to the determined slope object elements to be evaluated and the value ranges of the evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation levels comprise:
according to the value ranges of the determined evaluation indexes under different risk evaluation grades, the classical domain matter element R is determinedjAnd a domain-saving matter element Rp(ii) a Wherein the content of the first and second substances,
classical domain matter element RjExpressed as:
Figure FDA0003129363430000024
wherein N isjRepresent four risk assessment ratings, grade I-IV, with j being 1, 2, 3, 4, ci8 evaluation indexes of the slope are shown, i is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, vji＝<aji，bji>Indicates the evaluation index ciAt each risk evaluation level NjThe following value ranges;
node domain matter element RpExpressed as:
Figure FDA0003129363430000031
wherein P represents the overall risk assessment scale, vpi＝<api，bpi>Indicates the evaluation index ciAt all inValue range under risk evaluation level;
determining a slope matter element R to be evaluatedx：
Figure FDA0003129363430000032
Wherein, PxIndicating the side slope to be evaluated, xiIs PxRegarding the evaluation index ciActual value of (2);
according to the determined classical domain matter element RjRegion-saving matter element RpAnd the slope object element R to be evaluatedxDetermining the extension distance of each evaluation index relative to each risk evaluation grade;
and calculating the association degree of the single evaluation index by using an association function according to the determined extension distance of each evaluation index relative to each risk evaluation grade.
8. The slope safety risk evaluation method according to claim 7, wherein if the risk evaluation level belongs to level II or level III, the actual value x of the ith evaluation indexiExtension ρ (x) for jth risk assessment leveli，Xji) Expressed as:
Figure FDA0003129363430000033
if the risk evaluation grade belongs to grade I or grade IV, the actual value x of the ith evaluation indexiExtension ρ (x) for jth risk assessment leveli，Xji) Expressed as:
Figure FDA0003129363430000034
wherein, XjiDenotes the ith evaluation index with respect to the jth risk evaluation level section, Xji＝<aji，bji>，X1、X4The risk evaluation levels are represented as class I and class IV intervals.
9. The slope safety risk evaluation method according to claim 8, wherein the single evaluation index association degree is expressed as:
Figure FDA0003129363430000041
Figure FDA0003129363430000042
Figure FDA0003129363430000043
ρ(Xji)＝|bji-aji|
wherein, Kj(xi) A correlation function representing the ith evaluation index with respect to the jth risk evaluation level, X represents the entire section of the ith evaluation index, api、bpiUpper and lower limits respectively representing all the sections of the ith evaluation index;
the overall relevance is expressed as:
Figure FDA0003129363430000044
wherein, Kj(Px) And representing the comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under the jth risk evaluation level.
10. The slope safety risk evaluation method according to claim 9, wherein the variable characteristic values of each risk evaluation level of the slope to be evaluated are represented as:
Figure FDA0003129363430000045
Figure FDA0003129363430000046
wherein j is*Representing the risk evaluation grade variable characteristic value, min and max respectively representing the minimum value and the maximum value,
Figure FDA0003129363430000047
and the normalized numerical value represents the comprehensive association degree of the slope to be evaluated under the jth risk evaluation level.
CN202110699839.9A 2021-06-23 2021-06-23 Slope safety risk evaluation method Pending CN113469513A (en)

Priority Applications (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
CN202110699839.9A CN113469513A (en) 2021-06-23 2021-06-23 Slope safety risk evaluation method

Applications Claiming Priority (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
CN202110699839.9A CN113469513A (en) 2021-06-23 2021-06-23 Slope safety risk evaluation method

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
CN113469513A true CN113469513A (en) 2021-10-01

Family

ID=77872472

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
CN202110699839.9A Pending CN113469513A (en) 2021-06-23 2021-06-23 Slope safety risk evaluation method

Country Status (1)

Country Link
CN (1) CN113469513A (en)

Citations (5)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN103268420A (en) * 2013-05-24 2013-08-28 河海大学 Method for evaluating risks of high rock slope
CN107169289A (en) * 2017-05-19 2017-09-15 西安工程大学 It is a kind of based on the Landslide Hazard Assessment method of optimal weights combination method can be opened up
CN107194049A (en) * 2017-05-09 2017-09-22 山东大学 A kind of multi objective Grade system of tunnels and underground engineering rockfall risk
CN110135759A (en) * 2019-05-24 2019-08-16 贵州大学 A kind of Coal Mine Security Evaluation method based on entropy weight Element Extension Model
CN111415492A (en) * 2020-04-29 2020-07-14 中国水利水电科学研究院 Slope landslide early warning method and system based on fuzzy comprehensive evaluation algorithm

Patent Citations (5)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN103268420A (en) * 2013-05-24 2013-08-28 河海大学 Method for evaluating risks of high rock slope
CN107194049A (en) * 2017-05-09 2017-09-22 山东大学 A kind of multi objective Grade system of tunnels and underground engineering rockfall risk
CN107169289A (en) * 2017-05-19 2017-09-15 西安工程大学 It is a kind of based on the Landslide Hazard Assessment method of optimal weights combination method can be opened up
CN110135759A (en) * 2019-05-24 2019-08-16 贵州大学 A kind of Coal Mine Security Evaluation method based on entropy weight Element Extension Model
CN111415492A (en) * 2020-04-29 2020-07-14 中国水利水电科学研究院 Slope landslide early warning method and system based on fuzzy comprehensive evaluation algorithm

Non-Patent Citations (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
张葭伊;吕淑然;张宇栋;: "基于WSR-熵权物元可拓模型的古建筑火灾风险等级评价", 安全与环境工程, no. 02, pages 130 - 135 *
杜发兴;肖博文;王雪蓉;吴厚发;: "基于多级可拓模型的边坡稳定性评价", 水力发电, no. 09, pages 42 - 45 *
王新民;康虔;秦健春;张钦礼;王石;: "层次分析法-可拓学模型在岩质边坡稳定性安全评价中的应用", 中南大学学报(自然科学版), no. 06, pages 280 - 287 *
黄文杰;: "基于物元分析法的露天矿边坡稳定性评价", 有色金属(矿山部分), no. 01, pages 62 - 66 *

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
CN111859288B (en) Goaf spontaneous combustion risk prediction method
CN105023067A (en) Analytic hierarchy process-fuzzy comprehensive evaluation-based chemical project environmental risk evaluation system
CN103886168A (en) Multi-channel analysis method and device based on analytic hierarchy process
CN110276116B (en) Coal mine water inrush source distinguishing method and system
CN115063056B (en) Construction behavior safety risk dynamic analysis method based on graph topology analysis improvement
CN116127378A (en) Highway tunnel lining service state evaluation method based on improved extension cloud model
CN103198362A (en) Method for coal mine safety evaluation
CN116596303A (en) Drought risk assessment and zoning method, system, medium, equipment and terminal
CN115471097A (en) Data-driven underground local area safety state evaluation method
CN110009241B (en) Method and device for evaluating fire safety level of in-service power cable channel
CN112001600B (en) Water leakage risk monitoring method based on SVM and DS theory
CN113469513A (en) Slope safety risk evaluation method
CN116468282A (en) Tunnel burst water risk level assessment method
CN110866694A (en) Power grid construction project financial evaluation system and method
CN112464168B (en) Comprehensive energy potential user targeting evaluation and extraction method
CN114118688A (en) Power grid engineering cost risk early warning method based on sequence relation analysis
CN114499957A (en) Network information security dynamic evaluation system and method thereof
CN111222678A (en) Road surface technical condition prediction method
CN113344403B (en) Stability evaluation method for goaf construction site
CN117474328A (en) Rock foundation pit risk assessment method
CN117994061A (en) Topsis grouting technology applicability comprehensive evaluation method based on combined weighting
Xing et al. Rockburst risk assessment model based on improved catastrophe progression method and its application
CN117034685A (en) Mechanical property evaluation method for shield tunnel structure after fire disaster
Ma et al. risk evaluation method based on set pair analysis applied to overseas mining investment
CN104484768A (en) Transverse comparison post-evaluation method for oil and gas pipeline engineering project

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