Study of disaster-prone geological structures and instability modes of typical goaf landslides in mountainous areas of southwest China
-
摘要: 在中国西南山区采空区滑坡频发，为研究此类滑坡之间存在的共性及差异，制定科学的防灾减灾对策，文章以灰岩山区的鸡冠岭滑坡、碎屑岩山区的赵家沟滑坡及变质岩山区的山阳滑坡3个采空区滑坡为研究对象进行对比研究，采用资料收集分析、现场调查、多期遥感解译、岩土体物理力学试验与数值模拟等方法，分析三者易灾地质结构与失稳机制的异同。研究结果表明，当斜坡具备陡峭地形、良好的临空条件、上陡下缓的“靴状地形”及二元结构等特征时，易于发生滑坡灾害，采空工况下各滑坡位移量增大，最大剪应变增量集中分布于潜在滑动面及采空区顶板区域，各滑坡整体稳定性降低。灰岩山区呈硬岩夹软岩型，以厚层硬岩夹薄层软岩为特征，呈高强度岩体特性，鸡冠岭滑坡因煤层开采较为垂直导致上部岩体拉剪应力集中，形成倾倒式滑坡,为“倾倒−滑移”破坏模式；碎屑岩山区呈软硬岩互层型，受薄层碎裂状软硬岩互层结构影响，岩体整体强度弱化，赵家沟滑坡因采空区顶板沉降形成“漏斗状”位移场,呈“蠕滑−拉裂”破坏模式；变质岩山区为典型上硬下软型，呈上部硬岩下部软岩结构，强度差异大，山阳滑坡变形机制表现为滑体剪切滑移与采空区顶板挠曲变形,呈“滑移−溃屈”破坏模式。文章可为采动型滑坡的早期识别与成灾模式研究提供重要科学依据。Abstract:
Objective Landslides occur frequently in the goaf areas of mountainous areas in Southwest China. This study aims to explore the commonalities and differences among such landslides to support the development of scientific disaster prevention and mitigation measures. Methods A comparative study was conducted using three research objects: the Jiguanling Landslide in a limestone area, the Zhaojiagou Landslide in a clastic rock area, and the Shanyang Landslide in a metamorphic rock area. Methods included data collection and analysis, on-site investigation, multi-phase remote sensing interpretation, physical and mechanical testing of rock and soil masses, and numerical simulation. These methods were employed to analyze similarities and differences in disaster-prone geological structures and instability mechanisms among the selected landslides. Results Landslide disasters are prone to occur on slopes characterized by steep terrains, favorable overhanging conditions, and binary structures. Numerical simulations indicate that under goaf conditions, the displacement of each landslide increases, the maximum shear strain increments concentrate on the potential sliding surface and the goaf roof area, and the overall stability of each landslide decreases. Conclusions The limestone mountainous area is characterized by thick layers of hard rock interbedded with thin layers of soft rock, presenting high rock mass strength. The Jiguanling Landslide belongs to the toppling–sliding failure mode. The clastic rock mountainous area is affected by interbedding of thin layers of fragmented soft and hard rock, with overall rock mass strength weakened. The Zhaojiagou Landslide belongs to the creep–tensile fracture failure mode. The metamorphic rock mountainous area exhibits hard rock at the top and soft rock at the bottom, with significant differences in strength. The Shanyang Landslide belongs to the slipping-collapse failure mode. [ Significance ] This study provides an important scientific basis for the early identification of goaf landslides and for studying goaf-related disaster formation patterns. -
图 2 鸡冠岭滑坡工程地质剖面A-A'（据贺凯等，2018修改；剖面位置见图1）
1—二叠系中统长兴组灰岩；2—二叠系吴家坪组上段页岩、灰岩；3—二叠系吴家坪组下段页岩、灰岩、煤层；4—二叠系下统栖霞茅口组灰岩；5—二叠系下统梁山组页岩夹灰岩；6—志留系罗惹坪组页岩夹粉砂岩；7—堆积体；8—采空区；9—原始地形线；10—滑动面
Figure 2. Engineering geological section A–A' of the Jiguanling Landslide (modified from He et al., 2018; Section location is shown in Fig. 1)
1—limestone of the Changxing Formation, Middle Permian; 2—shale and limestone of the Upper Wujiaping Formation, Permian; 3—shale, limestone, and coal seam of the Lower Wujiaping Formation, Permian; 4—limestone of the Qixia–Maokou Formation, Lower Permian; 5—shale intercalated with limestone of the Liangshan Formation, Lower Permian; 6—shale intercalated with siltstone of the Luoreping Formation, Silurian; 7—accumulation deposit; 8—goaf; 9—original topographic line; 10—sliding surface
图 3 鸡冠岭滑坡滑源区地质结构（镜向：204°）
Figure 3. Geological structure of the source area of the Jiguanling Landslide (facing 204°)
图 5 赵家沟滑坡工程地质剖面A-A'（据殷跃平等，2013修改；剖面位置见图4）
1—三叠系永宁镇组泥质灰岩、白云岩夹黏土岩；2—三叠系飞仙关组上段粉砂岩、细砂岩、页岩夹灰岩；3—三叠系飞仙关组下段粉砂岩、泥岩；4—二叠系长兴组灰岩、页岩、煤线；5—二叠系龙潭组粉砂岩、页岩夹煤层；6—二叠系峨眉山玄武岩组玄武岩夹凝灰岩、砂砾岩；7—堆积体；8—原始地形线；9—滑动面；10—滑体
Figure 5. Engineering geological section A–A' of the Zhaojiagou Landslide (modified from Yin et al., 2013; Section location is shown in Fig. 4)
1—muddy limestone and dolomite intercalated with claystone of the Yongningzhen Formation, Triassic; 2—siltstone, fine sandstone, and shale intercalated with limestone of the Upper Feixianguan Formation, Triassic; 3—siltstone and mudstone of the Lower Feixianguan Formation, Triassic; 4—limestone, shale, and coal streak of the Changxing Formation, Permian; 5—siltstone and shale intercalated with coal seam of the Longtan Formation, Permian; 6—basalt intercalated with tuff and sandstone-conglomerate of the Emeishan Basalt Formation, Permian; 7—accumulation deposit; 8—original topographic line; 9—sliding surface; 10—sliding mass
图 6 赵家沟滑坡滑源区地质结构（镜向：219°）
Figure 6. Geological structure of the source area of the Zhaojiagou Landslide (facing 219°)
图 8 山阳滑坡工程地质剖面A-A'（据孟桓羽等，2023修改；剖面位置见图7）
1—震旦系灯影组一段厚层−巨厚层白云岩；2—震旦系灯影组二段厚层白云岩；3—下寒武统水沟口组一段夹薄层黏土硅质板岩；4—下寒武统水沟口组二段厚层硅质岩、钒矿层；5—下寒武统水沟口组三段杂色黏土岩；6—中寒武统岳家坪组灰岩；7—堆积体；8—采空区；9—原始地形线；10—滑动面；11—平行不整合面；12—滑体
Figure 8. Engineering geological section A–A' of the Shanyang Landslide (modified from Meng et al., 2023; Section location is shown in Fig. 7)
1—thick to very thick dolomite of the First Member, Dengying Formation, Sinian; 2—thick dolomite of the Second Member, Dengying Formation, Sinian; 3—thin-bedded clayey siliceous slate intercalated of the First Member, Shuigoukou Formation, Lower Cambrian; 4—thick siliceous rock and vanadium ore layer of the Second Member, Shuigoukou Formation, Lower Cambrian; 5—variegated claystone of the Third Member, Shuigoukou Formation, Lower Cambrian; 6—limestone of the Yuejiaping Formation, Middle Cambrian; 7—accumulation deposit; 8—goaf; 9—original topographic line; 10—sliding surface; 11—parallel unconformity; 12—sliding mass
图 9 山阳滑坡滑源区地质结构（镜向：238°）
Figure 9. Geological structure of the source area of the Shanyang Landslide (facing 238°)
图 10 鸡冠岭滑坡失稳机制数值模拟
a—三维地质模型；b—天然工况下剖面总位移；c—采空工况下剖面总位移；d—采空工况下最大剪应变增量
Figure 10. Numerical simulation of the instability mechanism of the Jiguanling Landslide
(a) Three-dimensional geological model; (b) Total displacement of the section under natural conditions; (c) Total displacement of the section under mine goaf conditions; (d) The maximum increment of the shear strain under mine goaf conditions
图 11 鸡冠岭滑坡破坏模式（据李滨等，2015a修改）
a—初始蠕变阶段；b—裂缝扩展、岩体弯曲阶段；c—倾倒挤压阶段；d—剪切滑移、整体失稳阶段
Figure 11. Failure mode of the Jiguanling Landslide (modified from Li et al., 2015a)
(a) Initial creep stage; (b) Fracture propagation and rock mass bending stage; (c) Pouring and squeezing stage; (d) Shear slip and overall instability stage
图 12 赵家沟滑坡失稳机制数值模拟
a—三维地质模型；b—天然工况下剖面总位移；c—采空工况下剖面总位移；d—采空工况下最大剪应变增量
Figure 12. Numerical simulation of the instability mechanism of the Zhaojiagou Landslide
(a) Three-dimensional geological model; (b) Total displacement of the section under natural conditions; (c) Total displacement of the section under mine goaf conditions; (d) The maximum increment of the shear strain under mine goaf conditions
图 13 赵家沟滑坡破坏模式
a—初始蠕滑阶段；b—裂缝发育阶段；c—渗流促滑阶段；d—拉裂失稳阶段
Figure 13. Failure mode of the Zhaojiagou Landslide
(a) Initial creep stage; (b) Crack development stage; (c) Seepage and sliding promotion stage; (d) Cracking and instability stage
图 14 山阳滑坡失稳机制数值模拟
a—三维地质模型；b—天然工况下剖面总位移；c—采空工况下剖面总位移；d—采空工况下最大剪应变增量
Figure 14. Numerical simulation of the instability mechanism of the Shanyang Landslide
(a) Three-dimensional geological model; (b) Total displacement of the section under natural conditions; (c) Total displacement of the section under mine goaf conditions; (d) The maximum increment of the shear strain under mine goaf conditions
图 15 山阳滑坡破坏模式（据杨海龙等，2016；孟桓羽等，2023修改）
a—顺层蠕滑阶段；b—后缘裂缝扩展阶段；c—阻滑块体结构损伤阶段；d—溃屈失稳阶段
Figure 15. Failure mode of the Shanyang Landslide (modified from Yang et al., 2016; Meng et al., 2023)
(a) Bedding creep and sliding stage; (b) Trailing edge crack propagation stage; (c) Structural damage stage of the anti-sliding block; (d) Collapse and instability stage
表 1 灰岩山区岩体物理力学参数（数据来自王国章，2014；李滨等，2015a）
Table 1. Physical and mechanical parameters of rock mass in limestone mountainous areas (data from Wang, 2014; Li et al., 2015a)
岩性 容重/
kN•m−3黏聚力c/MPa 内摩擦角φ/° 弹性模量/
MPa抗压强度/
MPa抗拉强度/
MPa泊松比 灰岩 25.0 9.38 40 12000 48.70 0.95 0.20 页岩 — 5.48 30 5500 24.20 0.40 0.26 煤层 15.0 0.30 20 5500 — 0.40 0.26 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 碎屑岩山区岩体物理力学参数
Table 2. Physical and mechanical parameters of rock mass in clastic rock mountainous areas
岩性 黏聚力c/MPa 内摩擦角φ/° 弹性模量/GPa 抗压强度/MPa 泊松比 灰岩 17.1 42.7 19.7 92.3 0.18 铁质砂岩 10.1 42.8 11.7 68.7 0.20 泥质砂岩 8.46 42.2 9.43 57.4 0.23 钙质砂岩 14.9 43.2 15.4 78.5 0.19 泥岩 4.89 39.4 6.87 37.6 0.25
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 变质岩山区岩体物理力学参数（数据来自阴晓冬，2018；王佳运等，2019；亢佳乐，2022）
Table 3. Physical and mechanical parameters of rock mass in metamorphic rock mountainous areas (data from Yin, 2018; Wang et al., 2019; Kang, 2022)
岩性 容重/
（kN•m−3）黏聚力c/MPa 内摩擦角φ/（°） 弹性模量/
GPa抗压强度/
MPa抗拉强度/
MPa泊松比 白云岩 28.00 7.18 48.53 31.67 63.70 0.13 0.22 硅质岩 26.00 1.69 46.15 78.00 98.64 — 0.17 钒矿层 25.37 1.50 30.00 12.58 — 2.00 0.28 灰岩 27.00 7.00 34.50 43.69 — 4.50 0.20
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 采空区滑坡易灾地质结构综合对比
Table 4. Comprehensive comparison of geological structures prone to landslides in goaf areas
易灾地质结构 灰岩山区鸡冠岭滑坡 碎屑岩山区赵家沟滑坡 变质岩山区山阳滑坡 地形条件 高陡 上陡下缓靴状地形 陡峻山脊 微地貌类型 岩溶中山地貌 溶蚀−侵蚀中山地貌 中山陡坡地貌 地质构造 桐麻湾背斜核部西翼 大擢魁向斜西北翼，呈单斜构造 耀岭河倒转背斜倒转翼，呈北倾单斜构造 临空条件 两侧临空 平缓开阔 三面临空
地层岩性上部为灰岩
中部为页岩夹煤层,下部为灰岩上部基岩为砂岩与泥岩互层
下部砂岩页岩煤层上部为白云岩
下部硅质岩与硅质板岩、钒矿层岩性组合 上硬下软二元结构 软硬相间二元结构 上硬下软二元结构 岩体结构 层状块裂 薄层碎裂状 层状板裂及层状块裂 斜坡结构类型 陡倾层状横向岩质斜坡 逆向坡 陡倾层状斜向顺层岩质斜坡 结构面 两组 多组 三组 关键主控地层 二叠系吴家坪组（P2w） 三叠系飞仙关组（T1f） 下寒武统水沟口组（Є1sg） 岩体力学强度 硬岩夹软岩型，整体强度较高 软硬岩互层型，整体强度较低 典型上硬下软型，强度差异大 主要地下水类型 岩溶水 基岩裂隙水 基岩裂隙水 矿物种类 煤矿 煤矿 钒矿 矿层采动方式 掩护支架采煤法 平巷开采技术 人工爆破、钻爆法、房柱式崩落回采 主要滑体成分 灰岩 残坡积层黏土夹碎块石 白云岩
下载: 导出CSV
表 5 赵家沟滑坡岩土体物理力学参数取值表（数据来自殷跃平等, 2013）
Table 5. Physical and mechanical parameters of rock and soil mass in the Zhaojiagou Landslide (data from Yin et al., 2013)
岩性 容重 /（kN•m−3） 黏聚力c/MPa 内摩擦角φ/（°） 弹性模量/MPa 泊松比 滑体 18.5 0.10 16.0 10000 0.30 滑床 21.5 0.20 20.5 100000 0.25 煤层 15.0 0.30 20.0 5500 0.26
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] CHEN Z S, ZHANG X G, 1994. A hazard-chain of landslio→collapse→debris flow→river stoppage in Wulong county, Sichuan Province on April 30, 1994[J]. Mountain Research, 12(4): 225-229. (in Chinese with English abstract) [2] FATHI SALMI E, NAZEM M, KARAKUS M, 2017. Numerical analysis of a large landslide induced by coal mining subsidence[J]. Engineering Geology, 217: 141-152. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2016.12.021 [3] GAO F, CHEN A Y, XU F D, et al., 2024. Strength characteristics of the sliding zone soil of bedding deep cutting slopes and early warning analysis of the reserved thickness of the base[J]. Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology, 43(3): 279-288. (in Chinese with English abstract) [4] GAO L J, FENG B, JIN F D, 2024. Control of surface movement and deformation during coordinated mining of large dip coal seams[J]. Safety in Coal Mines, 55(9): 157-165. (in Chinese with English abstract) [5] HE K, GAO Y, WANG W P, et al., 2018. Physical model experimental study on deformation and failure of overlying rock slope under the condition of steep coal seam mining[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 24(3): 399-406. (in Chinese with English abstract) [6] JONES D B, SIDDLE H J, REDDISH D J, et al. , 1991. Landslides and undermining: slope stability interaction with mining subsidence behaviour[C]//7th ISRM congress. Aachen: ISRM. [7] KANG J L, 2022. Analysis of apparent tendency instability mechanism of bedding rock landslide: a case study of “8.12” landslide in Shanyang county, Shaanxi Province[D]. Xi’an: Chang'an University. (in Chinese with English abstract) [8] LI B, WANG G Z, FENG Z, et al., 2015a. Failure mechanism of steeply inclined rock slopes induced by underground mining[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 34(6): 1148-1161. (in Chinese with English abstract) [9] LI B, WANG G Z, FENG Z, et al., 2015b. Limit equilibrium and stability analysis of steep stratified rock slope[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 37(5): 839-846. (in Chinese with English abstract) [10] LI B, YIN Y P, GAO Y, et al., 2020. Critical issues in rock avalanches in the karst mountain areas of southwest China[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology, 47(4): 5-13. (in Chinese with English abstract) [11] LI B, ZHAO C Y, LI J, et al., 2023. Mechanism of mining-induced landslides in the karst mountains of Southwestern China: a case study of the Baiyan landslide in Guizhou[J]. Landslides, 20(7): 1481-1495. doi: 10.1007/s10346-023-02047-1 [12] LI C H, ZHANG K H, 2025. Cause analysis and stability evaluation of a landslide in southeastern Tibet[J]. Railway Investigation and Surveying, 51(1): 13-19. [13] LI Z Q, XUE Y G, LI S C, et al., 2017. Deformation features and failure mechanism of steep rock slope under the mining activities and rainfall[J]. Journal of Mountain Science, 14(1): 31-45. doi: 10.1007/s11629-015-3781-6 [14] LIANG F, SHI W B, QIAN X L, et al. 2022. Study on deformation and failure mechanism of gentle anti-dipped slope induced by mining in mountain area: A case study of the Pusa village rock avalanche of Guizhou[J]. Journal of Natural Disasters, 31(4): 190-200. (in Chinese with English abstract) [15] LIU Y L, YANG T H, MA K, et al., 2023. Study on overburden damage and prevention of runoff disaster in multiseam mining of gully region[J]. Coal Science and Technology, 51(7): 243-254. (in Chinese with English abstract) [16] LONG J H, ZHU Q H, NI X L, 2021. Study on landslide model induced by underground resources exploitation: taking mining-triggered landslide as an example[J]. Coal Science and Technology, 49(8): 181-187. (in Chinese with English abstract) [17] DI Y, WEI Y J, TAN W J, et al., 2025. Risk assessment of landslide-induced river blockage based on RAMMS[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 32(5): 546-556. (in Chinese with English abstract) [18] MENG H Y, ZHAN J W, LU Q Z, et al., 2023. Kinematic characteristics and numerical simulation analysis of “8·12” giant landslide in Shanyang County, Shaanxi Province[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 31(6): 1910-1928. (in Chinese with English abstract) [19] REN W Z, GUO C M, PENG Z Q, et al., 2010. Model experimental research on deformation and subsidence characteristics of ground and wall rock due to mining under thick overlying terrane[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 47(4): 614-624. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrmms.2009.12.012 [20] SUN P, ZHANG S, KE C Y, et al., 2025. Evaluation of landslide susceptibility and contribution analysis of key driving factors on the Loess Plateau[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 31(5): 972-989. (in Chinese with English abstract) [21] TANG J X, LI W, ZHANG Z J, et al. , 2022. Analysis of deformation and failure characteristics of steep rock under repeated mining[J]. Safety in Coal Mines, 53(7): 215-220, 226. (in Chinese with English abstract) [22] WANG G Z, 2014. Research on the mechanism of steep dip layered rock slopes: a case study of Jiguanling landslide[D]. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiao Tong University (in Chinese with English abstract) [23] WANG G Z, LI B, FENG Z, et al., 2014. Simulation of the process of the Jiguanling rock avalanche in Wulong of Chongqing[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology, 41(5): 101-106. (in Chinese with English abstract) [24] WANG J Y, SHI X Y, 2018. Mechanical analysis of apparent dip Buckling mechanism of steep stratified oblique rock: a case study of Shanyang rockslide in Shaanxi province[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 24(4): 482-489. (in Chinese with English abstract) [25] WANG J Y, LI L, ZHENG D G, et al., 2018a. Characteristics of apparent dip slide and movement process of the “8·12” Shanyang rockslide[J]. Journal of Catastrophology, 33(1): 111-116. (in Chinese with English abstract) [26] WANG J Y, SHI X Y, WU L, et al., 2018b. Formation mechanism of apparent dip slide in the Shanyang "8.12" landslide[J]. Northwestern Geology, 51(3): 232-239. (in Chinese with English abstract) [27] WANG J Y, WANG G L, SHI X Y, 2019. Mechanical analysis of apparent dip creep-buckling failure of Shanyang super large-scale rockslide in Shaanxi Province[J]. Geology in China, 46(2): 381-388. (in Chinese with English abstract) [28] YAN H Y, CHEN W X, LENG Y Y, et al., 2023. Study on deformation characteristics of mining slope under different mining modes —Taken Fa’er coal mine as an example[J]. Guizhou Geology, 40(2): 145-152. (in Chinese with English abstract) [29] YANG H L, FAN X Y, ZHANG Y Y, et al. , 2016. Study on formation mechanism and motion characteristics of Yanjiagou landslide in Shanyang[J]. Subgrade Engineering(6): 30-35. (in Chinese with English abstract) [30] YANG X J, CHENG M J, WANG J, et al., 2023. Pressure relief mechanism of roof cutting of Fa'er coal mine in Guizhou and the evolution law of ground pressure during secondary mining[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 42(10): 2358-2371. (in Chinese with English abstract) [31] YANG Z M, HUANG G M, 1999. Deformation mechanism of declivity caused by underground mining movement[J]. Journal of Xi’an Mining Institute, 19(2): 105-109. (in Chinese with English abstract) [32] YAO X, YU K, ZHANG Y S, et al., 2014. Mechanisms of catastrophic landslide on January 11, 2013, in Zhenxiong county: fluidization initiation and movement liquefaction of high porosity soil[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 33(5): 1047-1054. (in Chinese with English abstract) [33] YIN X D, 2018. The study of deformation and damage mechanism of the bedrock landslide under underground mining[D]. Xi’an: Chang'an University. (in Chinese with English abstract) [34] YIN Y P, 2010. Mechanism of apparent dip slide of inclined bedding rockslide-a case study of Jiweishan rockslide in Wulong, Chongqing[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock mechanics and Engineering, 29(2): 217-226. (in Chinese with English abstract) [35] YIN Y P, LIU C Z, CHEN H Q, et al., 2013. Investigation on catastrophic landslide of January 11, 2013 at Zhaojiagou, Zhenxiong county, Yunnan province[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 21(1): 6-15. (in Chinese with English abstract) [36] YIN Y P, 2022. Methods and application practices of geological disaster risk investigation and evaluation[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 33(4): 5-6. (in Chinese with English abstract) (查阅网上资料, 未找到对应的英文翻译, 请确认) [37] YIN Y P, GAO S H, 2024. Research on high-altitude and long-runout rockslides: Review and prospects[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 35(1): 1-18. (in Chinese with English abstract) [38] YIN Z Q, XU Y Q, JIANG X W, 2015. The key triggering factor and its mitigation implication of Zhaojiagou catastrophic landslide in Zhenxiong County, Yunnan province[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 26(2): 36-42. (in Chinese with English abstract) [39] ZENG Q L, WANG W F, CHEN H Y, et al., 2016. Characteristics of Zhaojiagou colluviums landslide and its failure mechanism on slope structure, Zhenxiong county[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 24(4): 510-518. (in Chinese with English abstract) [40] ZHANG J Y, LYU D Y, LIU S B, et al., 2024. Development characteristics and risk assessment of geological hazards in the mountainous and hilly areas of western Zhengzhou City[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 30(4): 647-658. (in Chinese with English abstract) [41] ZHANG S B, SHI W B, WANG Y, et al., 2024. Process of deformation and destruction with super-high-steep and medium-gentle anti-dip slope by underground mining[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 32(5): 1669-1682. (in Chinese with English abstract) [42] ZHAO J J, LIN B, MA Y T, et al., 2016. Physical modeling on deformation characteristics of overlying rock mass above mined-out area in gently inclined coal seam[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 41(6): 1369-1374. (in Chinese with English abstract) [43] ZHU H H, ZHANG Q, ZHANG L Y, 2013. Review of research progresses and applications of Hoek-Brown strength criterion[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 32(10): 1945-1963. (in Chinese with English abstract) [44] ZHU S N, YIN Y P, LI B, 2018. Evolution characteristics of weak intercalation in massive layered rockslides: a case study of Jiweishan rockslide in Wulong, Chongqing[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 26(6): 1638-1647. (in Chinese with English abstract) [45] ZHU S N, YIN Y P, LI B, 2019. Shear creep behavior of soft interlayer in Permian carbonaceous shale[J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 40(4): 1377-1386. (in Chinese with English abstract) [46] ZHU S N, WEI Y J, WANG P, et al., 2021a. Research on deformation characteristics and instability mechanisms of large monoclinal layered bedrock landslides: a case study of the Longjing landslide in Shizhu County, Chongqing[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 40(4): 739-750. (in Chinese with English abstract) [47] ZHU S N, YIN Y P, WANG M, et al., 2021b. Instability mechanism and disaster mitigation measures of long-distance landslide at high location in Jinsha River junction zone: case study of Sela landslide in Jinsha River, Tibet[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 43(4): 688-697. (in Chinese with English abstract) [48] ZHU S N, YIN Y P, TIE Y B, et al., 2025. Deformation characteristics and reactivation mechanism of giant ancient landslide in Wumeng mountain area: case study of the Daguan ancient landslide[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 47(2): 305-314. (in Chinese with English abstract) [49] 陈自生, 张晓刚, 1994. 1994-04-30四川省武隆县鸡冠岭滑坡→崩塌→碎屑流→堵江灾害链[J]. 山地研究, 12(4): 225-229. [50] 高峰, 陈爱云, 许方党, 等, 2024. 顺层深路堑边坡滑带土强度特性和基底预留厚度预警分析[J]. 地质科技通报, 43(3): 279-288. doi: 10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.tb20220628 [51] 高利军, 冯斌, 晋发东, 2024. 大倾角煤层协调开采地表移动变形控制[J]. 煤矿安全, 55(9): 157-165. doi: 10.13347/j.cnki.mkaq.20230718 [52] 贺凯, 高杨, 王文沛, 等, 2018. 陡倾煤层开采条件下上覆山体变形破坏物理模型试验研究[J]. 地质力学学报, 24(3): 399-406. doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.2018.24.03.041 [53] 亢佳乐, 2022. 顺层岩质滑坡视倾向失稳机制分析: 以陕西山阳“8.12”滑坡为例[D]. 西安: 长安大学. [54] 李滨, 王国章, 冯振, 等, 2015a. 地下采空诱发陡倾层状岩质斜坡失稳机制研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 34(6): 1148-1161. doi: 10.13722/j.cnki.jrme.2014.0974 [55] 李滨, 王国章, 冯振, 等, 2015b. 陡倾层状岩质斜坡极限平衡稳定分析[J]. 岩土工程学报, 37(5): 839-846. [56] 李滨, 殷跃平, 高杨, 等, 2020. 西南岩溶山区大型崩滑灾害研究的关键问题[J]. 水文地质工程地质, 47(4): 5-13. doi: 10.16030/j.cnki.issn.1000-3665.202003060 [57] 李朝辉, 张柯宏, 2025. 藏东南某滑坡成因分析及稳定性评价[J]. 铁道勘察, 51(1): 13-19. doi: 10.19630/j.cnki.tdkc.202404300001 [58] 梁风, 史文兵, 钱孝龙, 等, 2022. 山区平缓倾内采动斜坡变形破坏机制研究: 以贵州普洒崩塌为例[J]. 自然灾害学报, 31(4): 190-200. doi: 10.13577/j.jnd.2022.0419 [59] 刘一龙, 杨天鸿, 马凯, 等, 2023. 沟谷区多煤层开采覆岩破坏及径流水害防治研究[J]. 煤炭科学技术, 51(7): 243-254. doi: 10.13199/j.cnki.cst.2023-0353 [60] 龙建辉, 朱清华, 倪向龙, 2021. 地下资源开采诱发的一种滑坡模式研究: 以采空触发滑坡为例[J]. 煤炭科学技术, 49(8): 181-187. [61] 邸勇, 魏云杰, 谭维佳, 等, 2025. 基于RAMMS的滑坡堵江危险性评价[J]. 地学前缘, 32(5): 546-556. [62] 孟桓羽, 占洁伟, 卢全中, 等, 2023. 陕西山阳“8·12”大型山体滑坡运动特征及数值模拟分析[J]. 工程地质学报, 31(6): 1910-1928. [63] 孙萍, 张帅, 柯超英, 等, 2025. 黄土高原滑坡易发性评价及其关键驱动因子贡献度分析[J]. 地质力学学报, 31(5): 972-989. doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.2025088 [64] 唐建新, 李伟, 张择靖, 等, 2022. 重复采动下陡岩变形破坏特征分析[J]. 煤矿安全, 53(7): 215-220, 226. doi: 10.13347/j.cnki.mkaq.2022.07.034 [65] 王国章, 2014. 陡倾层状岩质斜坡破坏机制研究: 以鸡冠岭崩塌滑坡为例[D]. 上海: 上海交通大学. [66] 王国章, 李滨, 冯振, 等, 2014. 重庆武隆鸡冠岭岩质崩滑−碎屑流过程模拟[J]. 水文地质工程地质, 41(5): 101-106. [67] 王佳运, 石小亚, 2018. 陡倾层状斜向岩层视向溃屈机制力学分析: 以陕西山阳滑坡为例[J]. 地质力学学报, 24(4): 482-489. doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.2018.24.04.050 [68] 王佳运, 李林, 郑定国, 等, 2018a. “8·12”山阳滑坡视向滑动特征与运动过程[J]. 灾害学, 33(1): 111-116. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-811X.2018.01.020 [69] 王佳运, 石小亚, 武立, 等, 2018b. “8.12”山阳滑坡视向滑动成因机理[J]. 西北地质, 51(3): 232-239. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-6248.2018.03.022 [70] 王佳运, 王根龙, 石小亚, 2019. 陕西山阳特大型滑坡视向滑移−溃屈破坏力学分析[J]. 中国地质, 46(2): 381-388. [71] 严浩元, 陈文祥, 冷洋洋, 等, 2023. 基于不同开采方式作用下采动斜坡变形特征研究: 以贵州发耳煤矿为例[J]. 贵州地质, 40(2): 145-152. [72] 杨海龙, 樊晓一, 张友谊, 等, 2016. 山阳烟家沟滑坡成因机制与运动特征研究[J]. 路基工程(6): 30-35. [73] 杨晓杰, 程满江, 王炯, 等, 2023. 贵州发耳煤矿二次回采切顶卸压机制及矿压演化规律[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 42(10): 2358-2371. [74] 杨忠民, 黄国明, 1999. 地下采动诱发斜坡变形机理[J]. 西安矿业学院学报, 19(2): 105-109. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-9315.1999.02.003 [75] 姚鑫, 余凯, 张永双, 等, 2014. “1·11”镇雄灾难性滑坡滑动机制: 高孔隙度土流态化启动与滑动液化[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 33(5): 1047-1054. [76] 阴晓冬, 2018. 地下采动作用下岩质边坡变形破坏机理研究[D]. 西安: 长安大学. [77] 殷跃平, 2010. 斜倾厚层山体滑坡视向滑动机制研究: 以重庆武隆鸡尾山滑坡为例[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 29(2): 217-226. [78] 殷跃平, 刘传正, 陈红旗, 等, 2013. 2013年1月11日云南镇雄赵家沟特大滑坡灾害研究[J]. 工程地质学报, 21(1): 6-15. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-9665.2013.01.002 [79] 殷跃平, 2022. 地质灾害风险调查评价方法与应用实践[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报, 33(4): 5-6. [80] 殷跃平, 高少华, 2024. 高位远程地质灾害研究: 回顾与展望[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报, 35(1): 1-18. [81] 殷志强, 徐永强, 姜兴武, 2015. 云南镇雄赵家沟灾难性滑坡主控因素及减灾启示[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报, 26(2): 36-42. [82] 曾庆利, 王炜风, 陈宏宇, 等, 2016. 镇雄赵家沟滑坡特征及基于坡体结构的失稳机理研究[J]. 工程地质学报, 24(4): 510-518. doi: 10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2016.04.004 [83] 张建羽, 吕敦玉, 刘松波, 等, 2024. 郑州市西部山地丘陵区地质灾害发育特征及危险性评价[J]. 地质力学学报, 30(4): 647-658. [84] 张顺波, 史文兵, 王勇, 等, 2024. 地下采动作用下超高陡中缓倾逆向坡变形破坏过程研究[J]. 工程地质学报, 32(5): 1669-1682. [85] 赵建军, 蔺冰, 马运韬, 等, 2016. 缓倾煤层采空区上覆岩体变形特征物理模拟研究[J]. 煤炭学报, 41(6): 1369-1374. doi: 10.13225/j.cnki.jccs.2015.1408 [86] 朱合华, 张琦, 章连洋, 2013. Hoek-Brown强度准则研究进展与应用综述[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 32(10): 1945-1963. [87] 朱赛楠, 殷跃平, 李滨, 2018. 大型层状基岩滑坡软弱夹层演化特征研究: 以重庆武隆鸡尾山滑坡为例[J]. 工程地质学报, 26(6): 1638-1647. [88] 朱赛楠, 殷跃平, 李滨, 2019. 二叠系炭质页岩软弱夹层剪切蠕变特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 40(4): 1377-1386. [89] 朱赛楠, 魏英娟, 王平, 等, 2021a. 大型单斜层状基岩滑坡变形特征与失稳机制研究: 以重庆石柱县龙井滑坡为例[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 40(4): 739-750. [90] 朱赛楠, 殷跃平, 王猛, 等, 2021b. 金沙江结合带高位远程滑坡失稳机理及减灾对策研究: 以金沙江色拉滑坡为例[J]. 岩土工程学报, 43(4): 688-697. [91] 朱赛楠, 殷跃平, 铁永波, 等, 2025. 乌蒙山区巨型古滑坡变形特征与复活机理研究: 以大关古滑坡为例[J]. 岩土工程学报, 47(2): 305-314. -
下载:
计量
- 文章访问数: 229
- HTML全文浏览量: 42
- PDF下载量: 145
- 被引次数: 0
