ISSN 1003-8035 CN 11-2852/P
  • 中国科技核心期刊
  • CSCD收录期刊
  • Caj-cd规范获奖期刊
欢迎扫码关注“i环境微平台”

留言板

尊敬的读者、作者、审稿人, 关于本刊的投稿、审稿、编辑和出版的任何问题, 您可以本页添加留言。我们将尽快给您答复。谢谢您的支持!

姓名
邮箱
手机号码
标题
留言内容
验证码

基于CF-AHP耦合模型的高速公路沿线崩塌地质灾害易发性评价

陈建国 钟连祥

陈建国,钟连祥. 基于CF-AHP耦合模型的高速公路沿线崩塌地质灾害易发性评价−以蓉遵高速公路土城-旺隆段为例[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2023,34(0): 1-11 doi: 10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.202208013
引用本文: 陈建国,钟连祥. 基于CF-AHP耦合模型的高速公路沿线崩塌地质灾害易发性评价−以蓉遵高速公路土城-旺隆段为例[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2023,34(0): 1-11 doi: 10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.202208013
CHEN Jianguo,ZHONG Lianxiang. Assessment of rockfall susceptibility along the expressway based on the CF-AHP coupling model: A case study of the tucheng-wanglong section of the rong zun expressway[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2023,34(0): 1-11 doi: 10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.202208013
Citation: CHEN Jianguo,ZHONG Lianxiang. Assessment of rockfall susceptibility along the expressway based on the CF-AHP coupling model: A case study of the tucheng-wanglong section of the rong zun expressway[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2023,34(0): 1-11 doi: 10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.202208013

基于CF-AHP耦合模型的高速公路沿线崩塌地质灾害易发性评价

doi: 10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.202208013
详细信息
    作者简介:

    陈建国(1976—),男,江西崇仁,本科,高级工程师,研究方向:岩土工程。E-mail:411927851@qq.com

    通讯作者:

    钟连祥(1993—),男,江西赣州,硕士,研究方向:地质灾害防治。E-mail:1121553890@qq.com

  • 中图分类号: P642.2

Assessment of rockfall susceptibility along the expressway based on the CF-AHP coupling model: A case study of the tucheng-wanglong section of the rong zun expressway

  • 摘要: 蓉遵高速公路(土城-旺隆段)沿线崩塌频繁发生,威胁公路安全甚至人类的生命财产安全。本文通过实地调查蓉遵高速公路(土城-旺隆段)崩塌地质灾害的影响因素,构建了9个影响因子,分别是地形起伏度、高程、归一化植被指数(NDVI)、坡向、地层岩性、距道路距离、距河流距离、坡度及降雨量。采用确定性系数模型(CF)、层次分析法(AHP)及耦合模型(CF-AHP)对研究区进行崩塌地质灾害易发性评价,并分别采用崩塌地质灾害点频率统计和成功率曲线对3种模型的评价精度进行检验。结果表明,CF、AHP和CF-AHP的AUC预测精度分别为0.848、0.835、0.866,且3种评价模型得到的崩塌地质灾害的高、中易发区频率比值占总频率比值均超过70%。 3种模型精确度由大到小分别为CF-AHP、CF、AHP模型,说明CF-AHP模型的滑坡预测优于单一的CF、AHP模型,能精确地评价蓉遵高速公路(土城-旺隆段)崩塌地质灾害易发性,为公路沿线区域崩塌灾害的防灾减灾提供决策依据。
  • 图  1  高速公路沿线崩塌地质灾害分布图

    Figure  1.  Distribution map of rockfall geological hazards along Expressway

    图  2  崩塌地质灾害规模统计

    Figure  2.  Statistics of rockfall geological hazard scale

    图  3  影响因子分级图

    Figure  3.  Classification diagram of evaluation factors

    图  4  高速公路沿线崩塌AHP层次模型示意图

    Figure  4.  Schematic diagram of AHP hierarchy model for rockfall along expressway

    图  5  易发性评价结果

    Figure  5.  Results of rockfall geohazard susceptibility

    图  6  ROC曲线图

    Figure  6.  TheReceiver Operation Characteristics (ROC) curve gragh

    表  1  判断矩阵标度及其含义

    Table  1.   Judgment matrix scale and its meaning

    标度值含义
    1表示两个因素相比,具有相同重要性
    3表示两个因素相比,前者比后者稍重要
    5表示两个因素相比,前者比后者明显重要
    7表示两个因素相比,前者比后者强烈重要
    9表示两个因素相比,前者比后者极端重要
    2,4,6,8表示上述相邻判断的中间值
    倒数与上述影响情况相反
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  3  中间层(B)判断矩阵

    Table  3.   Judgment matrix for intermediate layer (B)

    易发性诱发因素B2自然因素B1Wi
    诱发因素B210.33330.25
    自然因素B1310.75
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  2  评价因子分级及CF值

    Table  2.   Classification of evaluation factors and CF values of each grade

    指标因子分级面积/km2灾害点数/个点密度/个·km2CF值
    高程/m222~3257.27700−1
    325~4074.45861.3459860.297557
    407~4884.587102.1799320.566281
    488~5813.60941.108340.146942
    581~7901.45100−1
    坡度/(°)0~10°2.96200−1
    10°~20°4.49700−1
    20°~30°6.33530.473552−0.49914
    30°~40°4.993112.2029960.570822
    >40°2.59562.3124060.591128
    地形起伏度/m152~2851.06700−1
    286~3626.29020.31796−0.66371
    363~4396.17030.486192−0.48577
    440~5265.431152.7621260.657699
    527~6722.4400−1
    坡向/(°)平面0.00200−1
    2.43531.2318310.23246
    东北6.026101.6596130.430302
    5.40950.924385−0.02231
    东南3.19210.313254−0.66868
    1.95110.512505−0.45794
    西南0.55600−1
    西0.94300−1
    西北0.86800−1
    地层J3P10.20800−1
    Kjd113.538110.81254−0.14061
    Kjd23.33351.5002850.369801
    J3P24.08640.9789530.034193
    NDVI−0.0897~0.09621.48500−1
    0.0963~0.24052.52800−1
    0.2406~0.34323.04741.3129820.2799
    0.3433~0.4196.81771.0269050.079293
    0.4191~0.5347.30991.2313750.232177
    距道路距离/m502.85862.0990760.549574
    1002.86351.7464810.458638
    1502.85641.4007070.324999
    2002.80631.0690610.115599
    2502.64610.377929−0.60028
    >2507.12710.14031−0.8516
    距河流距离/m1005.86800−1
    2002.92831.0246950.077307
    3002.87882.7795150.659841
    4002.82482.8326610.666223
    5002.71310.36865−0.61009
    >5003.9330−1
    降雨量/mm8005.10841.379483−0.17168
    9008.06350.620109−0.34413
    10007.974110.7831620.314614
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  4  指标层(B1)判断矩阵

    Table  4.   Judgment matrix for indicator layer (B1)

    自然因素B1高程C1坡度C2坡向C3地形起伏度C4地层岩性C5NDVIC6Wi
    高程C110.333330.33330.2530.1017
    坡度C23150.50.333330.1815
    坡向C30.33330.210.20.220.0543
    地形起伏度C432510.540.247
    地层岩性C54352150.3673
    NDVIC60.33330.33330.50.250.210.0482
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  5  指标层(B2)判断矩阵

    Table  5.   Judgment matrix for indicator layer (B2)

    诱发因素B2降雨C7距河流距离C8距道路距离C9Wi
    降雨量C71310.4286
    距河流距离C80.333310.33330.1429
    距道路距离C91310.4286
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  6  各因子的权重

    Table  6.   Influence weight of each factor

    备选方案地层岩性C5地形起伏度C4坡度C2降雨量C7距道路距离C9高程C1坡向C3NDVI C6距河流距离C8
    权重0.27550.18520.13610.10710.10710.07630.04070.03610.0357
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  7  易发性评价结果

    Table  7.   Summary table of geohazard susceptibility for three models

    易发性等级CFAHPCF-AHP
    栅格数百分比栅格数百分比栅格数百分比
    极低易发区448219.4278415618.0147482620.9189
    低易发区693430.0564710530.7976802834.7984
    中易发区840936.4499785334.0399702930.4681
    高易发区324514.0659395617.1478318713.8145
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  8  地质灾害易发性评价结果检验

    Table  8.   Verification of Geohazards susceptibility assessment results

    易发性等级灾害点百分比/%
    CFAHPCF-AHP
    极低易发区000
    低易发区050
    中易发区252515
    高易发区757085
    下载: 导出CSV
  • [1] 覃乙根,杨根兰,鲁鲲鹏,等. 贵州寨子危岩崩塌风险定量评价研究[J]. 人民长江,2019,50(10):113 − 119. [QIN Yigen,YANG Genlan,LU Kunpeng,et al. Quantitative risk assessment for Zhaizi rockfall in Guizhou Province[J]. Yangtze River,2019,50(10):113 − 119. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [2] 谈树成,刘雪斌,谢亚亚,等. 某拟建高速公路地质灾害易发性评价[J]. 水土保持研究,2019,26(3):373 − 380. [TAN Shucheng,LIU Xuebin,XIE Yaya,et al. Assessment on susceptibility of geohazard for a proposed expressway[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2019,26(3):373 − 380. (in Chinese)
    [3] 崔志超,王俊豪,崔传峰,等. 基于层次分析法和模糊数学相结合的甘肃东乡八丹沟泥石流易发性评价[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2020,31(1):44 − 50. [CUI Zhichao,WANG Junhao,CUI Chuanfeng,et al. Evaluation of the susceptibility of debris flow in Badan Gully of Dongxiang County of Gansu based on AHP and Fuzzy mathematics[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2020,31(1):44 − 50. (in Chinese)
    [4] 刘宇恒,邓辉,熊倩莹. 基于层次分析法的茂县斜坡地质灾害易发性评价[J]. 长江科学院院报,2017,34(5):31 − 35. [LIU Yuheng,DENG Hui,XIONG Qianying. AHP-based evaluation of slope geo-hazard susceptibility ofMaoxian County,Sichuan,China[J]. Journal of Yangtze River Scientific Research Institute,2017,34(5):31 − 35. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.11988/ckyyb.20160155
    [5] 尚敏,马锐,张英莹,等. 基于GIS的证据权重法的崩塌敏感性分析研究[J]. 工程地质学报,2018,26(5):1211 − 1218. [SHANG Min,MA Rui,ZHANG Yingying,et al. GIS based weights of evidence method for rock fall susceptibility[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology,2018,26(5):1211 − 1218. (in Chinese)
    [6] 谭玉敏,郭栋,白冰心,等. 基于信息量模型的涪陵区地质灾害易发性评价[J]. 地球信息科学学报,2015,17(12):1554 − 1562. [TAN Yumin,GUO Dong,BAI Bingxin,et al. Geological hazard risk assessment based on information quantity model in Fuling district,Chongqing city,China[J]. Journal of Geo-Information Science,2015,17(12):1554 − 1562. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [7] 覃乙根,杨根兰,江兴元,等. 基于确定性系数模型与逻辑回归模型耦合的地质灾害易发性评价—以贵州省开阳县为例[J]. 科学技术与工程,2020,20(1):96 − 103. [QIN Yigen,YANG Genlan,JIANG Xingyuan,et al. Geohazard susceptibility assessment based on integrated certainty factor model and logistic regression model for Kaiyang,China[J]. Science Technology and Engineering,2020,20(1):96 − 103. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-1815.2020.01.015
    [8] 向喜琼,黄润秋. 基于GIS的人工神经网络模型在地质灾害危险性区划中的应用[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2000,11(3):23 − 27. [Xiang Xiqiong,Huang Runqiu. Application of GIS-based artificial Neural Networks on assessment of geohazards risk[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2000,11(3):23 − 27. (in Chinese)
    [9] 黄发明,殷坤龙,蒋水华,等. 基于聚类分析和支持向量机的滑坡易发性评价[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2018,37(1):156 − 167. [Huang Faming,Yin Kunlong,Jiang Shuihua,et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment based on clustering analysis and support vector machine[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,2018,37(1):156 − 167. (in Chinese)
    [10] 吴润泽,胡旭东,梅红波,等. 基于随机森林的滑坡空间易发性评价—以三峡库区湖北段为例[J]. 地球科学,2021(1):321 − 330. [WU Runze,HU Xudong,MEI Hongbo,et al. Spatial susceptibility assessment of landslides based on random forest:A case study from Hubei section in the Three Gorges Reservoir area[J]. Earth Science,2021(1):321 − 330. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [11] 胡涛,樊鑫,王硕,等. 基于逻辑回归模型和3S技术的思南县滑坡易发性评价[J]. 地质科技通报,2020(2):113 − 121. [HU Tao,FAN Xin,WANG Shuo,et al. Landslide susceptibility evaluation of Sinan County using logistics regression model and 3S technology[J]. Geological Science and Technology Information,2020(2):113 − 121. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [12] 覃乙根,杨根兰,谢金,等. 贵州省开阳县斜坡地质灾害孕灾因子敏感性分析[J]. 煤田地质与勘探,2020,48(4):190 − 198. [Qin Yigen,Yang Genlan,Xie Jin,et al. Sensitivity analysis of disaster-pregnant environmental factors for slope geological hazards in Kaiyang County,Guizhou Province[J]. Coal Geology & Exploration,2020,48(4):190 − 198. (in Chinese)
    [13] 刘光辉,刘汉湖,姚昆,等. 基于证据权法与确定系数法的滑坡危险区划对比分析—以虹口乡为例[J]. 物探化探计算技术,2016,38(6):848 − 853. [LIU Guanghui,LIU Hanhu,YAO Kun,et al. Based on the weights of evidence method and certainty factor method of landslide danger division comparative analysis:A case study in Hongkou,chine[J]. Computing Techniques for Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration,2016,38(6):848 − 853. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-1749.2016.06.21
    [14] 李益敏,李驭豪,赵志芳. 基于确定性系数模型的泸水市泥石流易发性评价[J]. 水土保持研究,2019,26(4):336 − 342. [LI Yimin,LI Yuhao,ZHAO Zhifang. Assessment on susceptibility of debris flow in Lushui based on the certain factor model[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2019,26(4):336 − 342. (in Chinese)
    [15] 杨栓成,王运生. 基于GIS的涪江上游南坝-水晶流域滑坡危险性评价[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2018,29(6):15 − 22. [YANG Shuancheng,WANG Yunsheng. GIS-based landslide risk assessment along the Nanba-Shuijing reaches in the Fujiang River[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2018,29(6):15 − 22. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [16] 李益敏,袁静,蒋德明,等. 基于GIS的高山峡谷区滑坡灾害危险性评价—以泸水市为例[J]. 水土保持研究,2021,28(3):355 − 363. [LI Yimin,YUAN Jing,JIANG Deming,et al. GIS-based risk assessment of landslide disaster in high mountain valley:Taking Lushui city as an example[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2021,28(3):355 − 363. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [17] 李萍,叶辉,谈树成. 基于层次分析法的永德县地质灾害易发性评价[J]. 水土保持研究,2021,28(5):394 − 399. [LI Ping,YE Hui,TAN Shucheng. Evaluation of geological hazards in Yongde County based on analytic hierarchy process[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2021,28(5):394 − 399. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [18] 刘建强,许强,郑光,等. 贵州省鸡场滑坡地下水化学特征反映的水-岩(土)作用[J]. 水文地质工程地质,2023,50(2):132 − 140. [LIU Jianqiang,XU Qiang,ZHENG Guang,et al. Water-rock/soil interaction reflected by the chemical characteristics of groundwater of Jichang landslide in Guizhou Province[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology,2023,50(2):132 − 140. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.16030/j.cnki.issn.1000-3665.202103009
    [19] 黄煜,谢婉丽,刘琦琦,等. 基于GIS与MaxEnt模型的滑坡易发性评价—以铜川市中部城区为例[J]. 西北地质,2023,56(1):266 − 275. [HUANG Yu,XIE Wanli,LIU Qiqi,et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment based on GIS and MaxEnt model:Example from central districts in Tongchuan city[J]. Northwestern Geology,2023,56(1):266 − 275. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.12401/j.nwg.2022001
    [20] 唐军峰,唐雪梅,周基,等. 滑坡堆积体变形失稳机制—以贵州剑河县东岭信滑坡为例[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版),2022,52(2):503 − 516. [TANG Junfeng,TANG Xuemei,ZHOU Ji,et al. Deformation and instability mechanism of landslide accumulation:A case study of donglingxin landslide accumulation in Jianhe County,Guizhou Province[J]. Journal of Jilin University (Earth Science Edition),2022,52(2):503 − 516. (in Chinese with English abstract)
    [21] 赵无忌,殷志强,马吉福,等. 黄河上游贵德盆地席芨滩巨型滑坡发育特征及地貌演化[J]. 地质论评,2016,62(3):709 − 721. [Zhao Wuji,Yin Zhiqiang,Ma Jifu,et al. Multi-stage development characteristics and geomorphic evolution process of the xijitan super large landslide in the guide basin,upper reaches of Yellow River[J]. Geological Review,2016,62(3):709 − 721. (in Chinese)
  • 加载中
图(7) / 表(8)
计量
  • 文章访问数:  34
  • HTML全文浏览量:  219
  • PDF下载量:  38
  • 被引次数: 0
出版历程
  • 录用日期:  2023-04-17
  • 网络出版日期:  2023-04-26

目录

    /

    返回文章
    返回