河南省嵩县地质灾害风险评价

王俊德; 杜晓阳; 黄天浩; 周晓鹏; 孙乐飞; 韩新志; 董利伟

doi:10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.202209005

河南省嵩县地质灾害风险评价

doi: 10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.202209005

王俊德^{1, 2,},
杜晓阳^{1, 2},
黄天浩^{1, 2},
周晓鹏^{1, 2},
孙乐飞^{1, 2},
韩新志^{1, 2},
董利伟³

1.
河南省第一地质矿产调查院有限公司，河南洛阳　471023
2.
河南省生态环境与勘查地球化学应用工程技术研究中心，河南洛阳　471023
3.
河南省地质科学研究院，河南郑州　470000

基金项目: 2021年度中央自然灾害防治体系建设补助资金项目《河南省嵩县1∶5万地质灾害风险调查（普查）评价》（豫财招标采购-2021-929-包10）

详细信息

作者简介:
王俊德（1980-），男，硕士，高级工程师，主要从事地质矿产、地质水工环及地质灾害等方面研究工作。E-mail：909902492@qq.com

计量
- 文章访问数: 330
- HTML全文浏览量: 177
- PDF下载量: 24
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2022-09-05
- 录用日期: 2023-05-04
- 修回日期: 2023-04-12
- 网络出版日期: 2023-05-14

Risk assessment of geological hazards in Song County, Henan Province

Junde WANG^{1, 2
,},
Xiaoyang DU^{1, 2},
Tianhao HUANG^{1, 2},
Lefei SUN^{1, 2},
Xiaopeng ZHOU^{1, 2},
Xinzhi HAN^{1, 2},
Liwei DONG³

1.
The First Institute of Geological and Mineral Resources Survey, Henan Bureau of Geology and Mineral Exploration and Development
2.
Key Laboratory of Gold and Silver Polymetallic Ore-forming Series and Deep Prognosis of Henan Province
3.
Henan Istitute of Geological Sciences

摘要

摘要: 基于ArcGIS环境下，通过选取河南省嵩县区域高程、地貌、工程岩组、植被覆盖度、距构造距离、距水系距离、坡度、坡向等 8个因子建立危险性评价模型，易损性选取建筑物、人员和交通等 3 个承灾因子，分别采用信息量模型和层次分析法对河南省嵩县区域进行地质灾害易发性、危险性和易损性评价。研究结果表明，嵩县区域划分为低风险区面积为965.34 km²，占嵩县区域面积32%；中风险区面积为1114.65 km²，占嵩县区域面积的37%；高风险区面积为826.23 km²，占嵩县区域面积的27%；极高风险区面积为102.68 km²，占嵩县区域面积的3%。研究成果可应用于嵩县防灾、减灾及地质灾害风险管控等方面。
- 基于ArcGIS /
- 河南省嵩县 /
- 地质灾害 /
- 风险评价
Abstract: Using the ArcGIS environment, a risk assessment model is established by selecting eight indicator factors, including regional elevation, landform, engineering rock group, vegetation coverage, distance from structures, distance from water systems, slope, and slope direction in Song county, Henan Province, China. The vulnerability is evaluated under three disaster-bearing factors: buildings, personnel and traffic. The information volume model and analytic hierarchy process are used to assess the susceptibility, risk and vulnerability of geological disasters in Song county. The results show that the area of Song county is divided into low-risk areas, covering 965.34 km², accounting for 32% of the total area; medium risk area, covering 1114.65 km², accounting for 37% of the total area; high-risk area, covering 826.23 km², accounting for 27% of the total area; and extremely high risk area, covering 102.68 km², accounting for 3% of the area. These research findings can be widely applied to disaster prevention, mitigation, and geological disaster risk control in Song county.
- ArcG¹IS Based /
- Song County, Henan Province /
- geologic hazard /
- risk assessment

HTML全文

图 1 研究区地质灾害

Figure 1. Site photos of geological hazards in the study area

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 研究区地质构造简图

1：第四系 2：中新统洛阳组 3：下白垩统九店组 4：下古生界二郎坪群 5：上元古界栾川群 6：中—上元古界宽坪群 7：中元古界熊耳群鸡蛋坪组 8：中元古界熊耳群马家河组-鸡蛋坪组并层 9：太古界太华群 10：花岗岩 11：陆浑水库 12：正断层及编号 13：逆断层及编号 14：性质不明断层 15：乡界 16：县界 17：县政府所在地 18：镇（乡）政府所在地

Figure 2. Geological structure sketch map of the study area

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 嵩县地质灾害隐患点分布图

Figure 3. Distribution map of geological hazard potential sites in Song county

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 嵩县地质灾害易发性分区结果图

Figure 4. Results of geological hazard susceptibility zoning in Song county

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 月累计降雨量归一化结果

Figure 5. Normalized results of monthly cumulative rainfall in the study area

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 易发性归一化结果

Figure 6. Normalized results of susceptibility in the study area

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 嵩县地质灾害危险性分区结果图

Figure 7. Geological hazard risk zoning results in Song county

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 承载体易损性分级结果图

Figure 8. Vulnerability classification results of bearing body

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 嵩县地质灾害易损性分区结果图

Figure 9. Geological hazard vulnerability zoning results in Song County

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 嵩县地质灾害风险分区图

Figure 10. Geological hazard risk zoning map of Song county

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 易发性评价因子分级及信息量值

Table 1. Classification and information value of susceptibility assessment factors

评价因子	指标分级	Ni/N	Si/S	信息量值
高程	0-500	0.3800	0.2146	0.5715
	500-1000	0.5800	0.5620	0.0316
	1000−1500	0.0400	0.1952	−1.5854
	>1500	0.0000	0.0282	0.0000
地貌	河谷	0.0558	0.0609	−0.0883
	中山	0.2988	0.3985	−0.2879
	低山	0.3183	0.3176	0.0037
	丘陵	0.3267	0.2230	0.3817
工程岩组	坚硬花岗岩岩组	0.1520	0.3001	−0.6803
	坚硬片麻岩岩组	0.0280	0.0563	−0.6992
	软弱粘性土岩组	0.1000	0.0881	0.1268
	较软弱砾岩岩组	0.0360	0.0164	0.7832
	较坚硬砂岩页岩互层岩组	0.0160	0.0113	0.3452
	较软弱砂质砾岩岩组	0.1880	0.1178	0.4674
	坚硬安山岩类岩组	0.3080	0.3421	−0.1049
	较软弱石英云母片岩岩组	0.1520	0.0455	1.2065
	较坚硬硅质板岩岩组	0.0120	0.0145	−0.1910
	较软弱页岩岩组	0.0040	0.0021	0.6393
	较坚硬灰岩岩组	0.0040	0.0057	−0.3503
植被覆盖度	0−0.5	0.1004	0.0553	0.5967
	0.5−0.65	0.5100	0.2945	0.5493
	0.65−0.75	0.3133	0.3799	−0.1928
	0.75−1	0.0763	0.2704	−1.2651
距构造距离	0−500	0.5000	0.3065	0.4892
	500−1000	0.1960	0.1905	0.0286
	1000−1500	0.1320	0.1241	0.0616
	1500−2000	0.0480	0.0903	−0.6318
	>2000	0.1240	0.2886	−0.8446
距水系距离	0−500	0.7800	0.5490	0.3512
	500−1000	0.1200	0.2563	−0.7588
	1000−1500	0.0600	0.1101	−0.6069
	1500−2000	0.0240	0.0415	−0.5476
	>2000	0.0160	0.0431	−0.9919
坡度	0−10	0.0680	0.1321	−0.6637
	10−25	0.3200	0.2117	0.4133
	25−40	0.2960	0.2936	0.0082
	>40	0.3160	0.3627	−0.1378
坡向	FLAT（−1）	0.0000	0.0106	0.0000
	N（337.5−22.5°）	0.0680	0.1427	−0.7415
	NE（22.5−67.5°）	0.1480	0.1352	0.0903
	E（67.5−112.5°）	0.1360	0.1130	0.1856
	SE（112.5−157.5°）	0.1720	0.1164	0.3901
	S（157.5−202.5°）	0.2160	0.1630	0.2814
	SW（202.5−247.5°）	0.1240	0.1236	0.0032
	W（247.5−292.5°）	0.0840	0.0922	−0.0928
	NW（292.5−337.5°）	0.0520	0.1033	−0.6862

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 嵩县1992-2021年降雨量统计表（单位： mm）

Table 2. Statistical table of Rainfall level in Song county from 1992 - 2021

年份	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001
年降雨量	576.90	675.20	529.60	470.70	959.10	418.10	773.10	589.90	760.30	433.10
月平均降雨量	48.08	56.27	44.13	39.23	79.93	34.84	64.43	49.16	231.50	36.09
年份	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011
年降雨量	657.60	1067.40	690.90	718.40	636.70	565.10	558.80	764.30	924.00	931.50
月平均降雨量	54.80	88.95	57.58	59.87	53.06	47.09	46.57	63.69	77.00	77.63
年份	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021
年降雨量	649.50	518.60	674.10	594.80	562.70	745.30	690.10	690.10	642.50	944.40
月平均降雨量	54.13	43.22	56.18	49.57	46.89	62.11	57.51	53.26	53.54	145.29

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 承灾体易损性赋值表

Table 3. Vulnerability evaluation table for disaster-bearing bodies

承灾体类型	分级	赋值
受地质灾害直接威胁人口数量	10 - 100人	0.4
受地质灾害直接威胁人口数量	＜10人	0.2
交通设施	高速公路	0.8
	国家级公路	0.7
	省级公路	0.4
	其他道路	0.25

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(20)

[1]	齐信,唐川,陈州丰,等. 地质灾害风险评价研究[J]. 自然灾害学报,2012,21(5):33 − 40. [QI Xin,TANG Chuan,CHEN Zhoufeng,et al. Research of geohazards risk assessment[J]. Journal of Natural Disasters,2012,21(5):33 − 40. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[2]	MANTOVANI F,SOETERS R,VAN WESTEN C J. Remote sensing techniques for landslide studies and hazard zonation in Europe[J]. Geomorphology,1996,15(3/4):213 − 225.
[3]	MICHAEL-LEIBA M,BAYNES F,SCOTT G,et al. Regional landslide risk to the Cairns community[J]. Natural Hazards,2003,30(2):233 − 249. doi: 10.1023/A:1026122518661
[4]	UROMEIHY A,MAHDAVIFAR M R. Landslide hazard zonation of the khorshrostam area,Iran[J]. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment,2000,58(3):207 − 213. doi: 10.1007/s100640050076
[5]	ALEOTTI P,CHOWDHURY R. Landslide hazard assessment:summary review and new perspectives[J]. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment,1999,58(1):21 − 44. doi: 10.1007/s100640050066
[6]	Einstein H H. Landslide risk-systenatic approaches to assessment and management[C]//In: Cruden D. and Fell R. （ eds. ） , Landslide Risk Assessment. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1997: 25 − 50.
[7]	VAN WESTEN C. Geo-Information tools for landslide risk assessment: An overview of recent developments[M]//Landslides: Evaluation and Stabilization/Glissement de Terrain: Evaluation et Stabilisation, Set of 2 Volumes. CRC Press, 2004: 39 − 56.
[8]	罗路广,裴向军,谷虎,等. 基于GIS的“8·8”九寨沟地震景区地质灾害风险评价[J]. 自然灾害学报,2020,29(3):193 − 202. [LUO Luguang,PEI Xiangjun,GU Hu,et al. Risk assessment of geohazards induced by “8·8” earthquake based on GIS in Jiuzhaigou scenic area[J]. Journal of Natural Disasters,2020,29(3):193 − 202. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[9]	高克昌,崔鹏,赵纯勇,等. 基于地理信息系统和信息量模型的滑坡危险性评价—以重庆万州为例[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2006,25(5):991 − 996. [GAO Kechang,CUI Peng,ZHAO Chunyong,et al. Landslide hazard evaluation of Wanzhou based on GIS information value method in the Three Gorges Reservoir[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,2006,25(5):991 − 996. (in Chinese)
[10]	阮沈勇,黄润秋. 基于GIS的信息量法模型在地质灾害危险性区划中的应用[J]. 成都理工学院学报,2001,28(1):89 − 92. [RUAN Shenyong,HUANG Runqiu. Application of gis-based information model on assessment of g eological hazards risk[J]. Journal of Chengdu University of Technology,2001,28(1):89 − 92. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[11]	刘福臻,王灵,肖东升. 机器学习模型在滑坡易发性评价中的应用[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2021,32(6):98 − 106. [LIU Fuzhen,WANG Ling,XIAO Dongsheng. Application of machine learning model in landslide susceptibility evaluation[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2021,32(6):98 − 106. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[12]	倪晓娇,南颖. 基于GIS的长白山地区地质灾害风险综合评估[J]. 自然灾害学报,2014,23(1):112 − 120. [NI Xiaojiao,NAN Ying. Comprehensive assessment of geological disasters risk in Changbai Mountain region based on GIS[J]. Journal of Natural Disasters,2014,23(1):112 − 120. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[13]	冯凡,唐亚明,潘学树,等. 不同尺度下地质灾害风险评价方法探讨—以陕西吴堡县为例[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2022,33(2):115 − 124. [FENG Fan,TANG Yaming,PAN Xueshu,et al. An attempt of risk assessment of geological hazards in different scales:A case study in Wubao County of Shaanxi Province[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2022,33(2):115 − 124. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[14]	李阳春,刘黔云,李潇,等. 基于机器学习的滑坡崩塌地质灾害气象风险预警研究[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2021,32(3):118 − 123. [LI Yangchun,LIU Qianyun,LI Xiao,et al. Exploring early warning and forecasting of meteorological risk of landslide and rockfall induced by meteorological factors by the approach of machine learning[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2021,32(3):118 − 123. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[15]	乔建平,王萌,石莉莉. 区域滑坡风险评估中的风险区划与概率分析[J]. 自然灾害学报,2012,21(2):51 − 56. [QIAO Jianping,WANG Meng,SHI Lili. Risk zoning and probability analysis of regional landslide risk assessment[J]. Journal of Natural Disasters,2012,21(2):51 − 56. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[16]	刘希林. 泥石流风险评价中若干问题的探讨[J]. 山地学报,2000,18(4):341 − 345. [LIU Xilin. Approaches to risk assessment of debris flow[J]. Journal of Mountain Research,2000,18(4):341 − 345. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[17]	王嘉君,何亚伯,杨琳,等. 基于GIS的山区村镇多灾种耦合风险评估[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2018,29(1):102 − 112. [WANG Jiajun,HE Yabo,YANG Lin,et al. Comprehensive multi-hazard risk assessment of villages and towns in mountain areas based on GIS[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2018,29(1):102 − 112. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[18]	刘传正. 论地质灾害风险识别问题[J]. 水文地质工程地质,2017,44(4):1 − 7. [LIU Chuanzheng. Research on the risk recognition of geological disasters[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology,2017,44(4):1 − 7. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[19]	刘传正. 崩塌滑坡灾害风险识别方法初步研究[J]. 工程地质学报,2019,27(1):88 − 97. [LIU Chuanzheng. Analysis methods on the risk identification of landslide disasters[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology,2019,27(1):88 − 97. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[20]	Alexander E D, Natural Disasters[M]. London: UCL Press Limited, 1993: 1 − 632.