STABILITY INVESTIGATION AND TREATMENT EVALUATION OF SLOPES IN THE EASTERN TIBET SECTION OF THE SICHUAN-TIBET HIGHWAY
-
摘要: 川藏公路是一带一路南亚通道的主要干线,其藏东段地质灾害频发,如何有效治理、保障安全畅通意义重大。文章在详细调查的基础上,对取得的藏东段沿线所有边坡数据进行统计及特征分析,利用随机森林理论建立了边坡稳定性评判模型,根据计算出的影响因素重要性大小对边坡的稳定性进行判别,模型检验表明其准确率超过94.44%,同时结合实地验证,对边坡的治理提出了可行性建议,为川藏公路藏东段的有效治理提供实用参考资料。Abstract: The eastern Tibet section of Sichuan-Tibet Highway is always suffered by unstable slopes even after years of repeated governance. In order to solve this urgent problem, a good knowledge of all slope data and slope treatment status of this area must be obtained. Totally 204 slopes along the Highway have been investigated in detail for three years. The present situation of slope treatment was counted, and its characteristics were analyzed distinguish by soil and rock landslides. Based upon data, factors causing slope instability were analyzed, and slope stability evaluation model was established using random forest method. The importance of influencing factors for slope stability and stability of all slopes were calculated by the model, and the model test showed that the accuracy was over 94.44%. The study results of this article could be used in the engineering management of highway works department. Also, suggestions are proposed on the management of highway slope based on the field investigation.
-
Key words:
- Sichuan-Tibet Highway /
- slope investigation /
- treatment evaluation /
- slope stability
-
表 1 边坡灾害野外调查内容
Table 1. Field investigation content of slope disasters
主要内容 详细内容 边坡概况 名称,类型,位置,高程,经纬度,坐标,地名,里程,编号 地质背景 微地貌,地层岩性,地质年代,产状,地质构造,地震与烈度,风化 地理环境 降水量,温度,温差,水系,土地利用类型,植被覆盖率 外形特征 坡长,坡高,坡宽,坡度,坡向,坡面形态 岩质边坡 结构类型、厚度、块度、裂隙组数;结构面的类型、产状、长度、间距、充填等;卸荷裂隙及全风化带深度,JRC估计值 土质边坡 土的名称、密实度、稠度;下伏基岩的产状、埋深、地层岩性及年代 水文地质 地表水与地下水的类型、埋深、露头,补给,排泄,侵蚀,搬运,沉积 斜坡变形 类型,部位,特征,产生时间,裂缝的长宽深 素描图示 平面图,剖面图,与公路的位置关系图 治理现状 稳定与否,治理方法,治理效果,治理次数,治理时间,存在问题 其他内容 失稳因素,危险性,危害性,建议监测措施,防治建议等 表 2 川藏公路藏东段边坡调查统计表
Table 2. Statistics and investigation of slopes in eastern Tibet section of the Sichuan-Tibet Highway
灾害路段 里程
(km)数量与密度 边坡类型/个 治理效果/个 数量/
个密度/
(个·100 km-1)岩质 土质 较好 较差 拉萨至巴河 322 27 8.39 3 24 6 21 巴河至波密 311 78 25.08 15 63 19 59 波密至邦达 313 65 20.77 12 53 11 54 邦达至巴塘 332 34 10.24 7 27 9 25 表 3 影响因素编号对照表
Table 3. Number of influencing factors
编号 影响因素 A 坡向 B 坡高 C 坡度 D 坡形 E 岩性 F 风化程度 G 堆积厚度 H 节理裂隙 I 地质构造 J 层理 K 降雨 L 融雪 M 河水侵蚀 N 地下水活动 O 地震 P 构造活动 Q 植被覆盖 R 工程建设 S 切坡加载 T 冻融 U 振动 表 4 随机森林的回判结果与真实值和SVM值对比
Table 4. The comparison of RF-inspection predicted results to measured values and SVM values
序号 实际结果 RF值 SVM值 1# 0 0 0 2# 0 0 0 3# 1 1 1 4# 0 0 0 5# 1 1 0* 6# 1 1 1 7# 1 1 1 8# 1 1 1 9# 0 0 0 10# 1 1 0* 11# 1 1 1 12# 0 0 0 13# 0 0 0 14# 0 0 0 表 5 随机森林的判别结果与实际值和SVM值对比
Table 5. The comparison of RF-inspection predicted results to measured values and SVM values
序号 实际结果 RF值 SVM值 1# 1 1 1 2# 0 0 0 3# 0 0 0 4# 0 0 0 5# 1 1 0* 6# 1 1 1 7# 0 0 0 8# 1 1 1 9# 1 1 1 10# 1 0* 0* 11# 0 0 0 12# 1 1 1 13# 1 1 1 14# 1 1 1 15# 0 0 0 16# 1 1 1 17# 0 0 0 18# 0 0 0 表 6 治理效果较差的边坡统计
Table 6. Statistics of the slopes with poor treatment effect
边坡类型 明洞、蓬洞 抗滑桩 挡土墙 锚固 排水 综合治理 岩质滑坡 0 1 5 1 2 0 土质滑坡 0 7 73 23 47 0 表 7 边坡治理现状统计
Table 7. Statistical analysis of treatment status quo of the slopes
边坡类型 规模 现有治理方法 存在不足 土质边坡 小型 挡墙 基本符合要求。 中型 挡墙或锚固 坡体地下水处理效果差。 大型 抗滑桩 对岩土工程性质、地下水以及危害性认识不足,治理方法欠妥。 岩质边坡 小型 定期清理 危害性没有引起足够重视。 中型 防护网 治理强度不足。 大型 锚固 危害性及稳定性判断不准确。 表 8 边坡新的治理建议及参考依据
Table 8. New treatment suggestions and reference basis for the slopes
边坡类型 规模 参考影响因素 整治建议 土质边坡 小型 治理效果较好。 斜坡基本稳定,无需再治理。 中型 降雨融雪、地下水、冻融等。 提高治理等级,强化地表水、地下水治理。 大型 岩性、降雨融雪及地下水,治理难度大。 结合资金和技术采用绕避或以桥隧通过。 岩质边坡 小型 风化严重、岩性。 采用喷锚治理或挂网治理。 中型 节理裂隙、风化、岩性等。 采用锚固+防护网治理。 大型 节理裂隙、风化、岩性、降雨融雪等。 建议全面勘察后进行综合治理。 -
[1] 汤明高, 傅涛, 张维科, 等.西藏G318典型地质灾害成因机制及防治对策[J].公路交通科技, 2012, 29(5):30~36. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-0268.2012.05.006TANG Minggao, FU Tao, ZHANG Weike, et al. Genetic mechanism of Geohazard along national highway 318 in Tibet and prevention countermeasure[J]. Journal of Highway and Transportation Research and Development, 2012, 29(5):30~36. (in Chinese with English abstract doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-0268.2012.05.006 [2] 中国科学院, 水利部成都山地灾害与环境研究所, 西藏自治区交通科学研究所.川藏公路典型山地灾害研究[M].成都: 成都科技大学出版社, 1999.Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, The Chinese Academy of Sciences and Water Conservancy Ministry, Institute of The Traffic Science, Tibet Autonomous Region. A study of typical mountain hazards along Sichuan-Tibet highway[M]. Chengdu: Chengdu University of Science and Technology Press, 1999. (in Chinese) [3] 尚彦军, 杨志法, 袁广祥, 等.雅鲁藏布江大拐弯北部川藏公路地质灾害发育与分布研究[M].北京:中国铁道出版社, 2010.SHANG Yanjun, YANG Zhifa, YUAN Guangxiang, et al. Geohazards development and distribution along Sichuan-Tibet highway in North of the grand canyon of Yarlu Tsangpo River[M]. Beijing:China Railway Publishing House, 2010. (in Chinese) [4] 杨志法, 尚彦军, 张路青, 等.川藏公路地质灾害及其防治对策研究——以八宿至林芝路段为例[M].北京:科学出版社, 2006.YANG Zhifa, SHANG Yanjun, ZHANG Luqing, et al. Geological disasters and its prevention and cure countermeasures of Sichuan-Tibet highway[M]. Beijing:Science Press, 2006. (in Chinese) [5] 孔纪名, 张小刚, 强巴.川藏公路拉月滑坡的块状破坏特征[J].山地学报, 2003, 21(2):228~233. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-2786.2003.02.015KONG Jiming, ZHANG Xiaogang, QIANG Ba. Rock lump of landslide of Layue destruction feature analysis in Sichuan-Xizang highway[J]. Journal of Mountain Science, 2003, 21(2):228~233. (in Chinese with English abstract doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-2786.2003.02.015 [6] 祝介旺, 苏天明, 张路青, 等.川藏公路102滑坡失稳因素与治理方案研究[J].水文地质工程地质, 2010, 37(3):43~47. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-3665.2010.03.010 [7] 廖秋林, 李晓, 董艳辉, 等.川藏公路林芝-八宿段地质灾害特征及形成机制初探[J].地质力学学报, 2004, 10(1):33~39. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-6616.2004.01.005LIAO Qiulin, LI Xiao, DONG Yanhui, et al. Characteristics and formation mechanism of geological hazards along the section from Nyingchi to Baxoi of the Sichuan-Tibet highway[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 2004, 10(1):33~39. (in Chinese with English abstract doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-6616.2004.01.005 [8] 吕光东, 何竹, 金建立.川藏公路西藏段主要地质灾害及成因分析[J].中国西部科技, 2009, 8(2):7~8. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-6396.2009.02.004LV Guangdong, HE Zhu, JIN Jianli. Analysis of the main geological disasters and their causes along Tibet section of Sichuan-Tibet highway[J]. Science and Technology of West China, 2009, 8(2):7~8. (in Chinese with English abstract doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-6396.2009.02.004 [9] 张佳佳, 陈龙, 王军朝, 等.藏东南鲁朗-通麦崩塌滑坡孕灾地质背景特征研究[J].地质力学学报, 2018, 24(4):474~481. http://journal.geomech.ac.cn/ch/reader/view_abstract.aspx?flag=1&file_no=20180404&journal_id=dzlxxbZHANG Jiajia, CHEN Long, WANG Junchao, et al. Study of disaster-inducing geological conditions of collapse and landslide along Lulang-Tongmai in SE Tibet[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 2018, 24(4):474~481. (in Chinese with English abstract http://journal.geomech.ac.cn/ch/reader/view_abstract.aspx?flag=1&file_no=20180404&journal_id=dzlxxb [10] 李铭, 支喜兰, 柳波.川藏公路南线西藏境内病害类型分析与防治措施研究[J].自然灾害学报, 2015, 24(1):185~190. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=zrzhxb201501024LI Ming, ZHI Xilan, LIU Bo. Type analysis and prevention-cotrol measures of disease in south line of Sichuan-Tibet highway in territory Tibet[J]. Journal of Natural Disasters, 2015, 24(1):185~190. (in Chinese with English abstract http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=zrzhxb201501024 [11] 冯雨林.三维遥感图像模型在川藏公路典型地质灾害预警中的应用[D].长春: 吉林大学, 2005.FENG Yulin. The application of three-dimensional remote sensing image model in representative geological disasters warming in Chengdu-Lhasa's national highway[D]. Changchun: Jilin University, 2005. (in Chinese) [12] 贾海兰.川藏公路沿线灾害的类型与特点[J].公路交通技术, 2005, (6):13~16, 35. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-6477.2005.06.004JIA Hailan. Types and features of along Sichuan-Tibet highway[J]. Technology of Highway and Transport, 2005, (6):13~16, 35. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-6477.2005.06.004 [13] Breiman L. Random forests[J]. Machine Learning, 2001, 45(1):5~32. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/gtzyyg201404010 [14] 萧超武, 蔡文学, 黄晓宇, 等.基于随机森林的个人信用评估模型研究及实证分析[J].管理现代化, 2014, 34(6):111~113. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-1154.2014.06.038XIAO Chaowu, CAI Wenxue, HUANG Xiaoyu, et al. The personal credit evaluation model based on random forest research and empirical analysis[J]. Management Science, 2014, 34(6):111~113. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-1154.2014.06.038 [15] 姚玮, 温树杰.随机森林模型在边坡稳定性预测中的应用[J].矿业研究与开发, 2017, 37(4):58~61. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=kyyjykf201704015YAO Wei, WEN Shujie. Application of random forest model in prediction of slope stability[J]. Mining Research and Development, 2017, 37(4):58~61. (in Chinese with English abstract http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=kyyjykf201704015 [16] 温廷新, 张波.露天煤矿边坡稳定性的随机森林预测模型[J].科技导报, 2014, 32(4~5):105~109. doi: 10.3981/j.issn.1000-7857.2014.h1.018WEN Tingxin, ZHANG Bo. Prediction model for open-pit coal mine slope stability based on random forest[J]. Science & Technology Review, 2014, 32(4~5):105~109. (in Chinese with English abstract doi: 10.3981/j.issn.1000-7857.2014.h1.018