›› 2013, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (S1): 355-364.

• 岩土工程研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

Verhulst滑坡预测预报模型的改进及其应用

贺小黑1, 2,王思敬1,肖锐铧1,饶枭宇3,罗 斌3   

  1. 1. 中国科学院地质与地球物理研究所 中国科学院工程地质力学重点实验室,北京 100029;2. 中国科学院 研究生院,北京 100049; 3. 重庆交通科研设计院有限公司,重庆 400067
  • 收稿日期:2012-08-07 出版日期:2013-08-30 发布日期:2014-06-09
  • 作者简介:贺小黑,男,1984年生,博士研究生,主要从事地质灾害及岩土体稳定性等方面的研究。
  • 基金资助:

    国家重点基础研究发展计划(973计划)资助(No. 2009CB724605, No. 2010CB731501);中国地质调查局工作项目资助(No. 1212011014026)

Improvement of Verhulst forecast model of landslide and its application

HE Xiao-hei1, 2,WANG Si-jing1,XIAO Rui-hua1,RAO Xiao-yu3,LUO Bin3   

  1. 1. Key Laboratory of Engineering Geomechanics, Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100029, China; 2. Graduate University, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China; 3. Chongqing Communications Research & Design Institute Co., Ltd., Chongqing 400067, China
  • Received:2012-08-07 Online:2013-08-30 Published:2014-06-09

摘要: Verhulst生物生长模型是一种统计型的滑坡预测预报模型,针对原始Verhulst模型中把第一个数据点作为已知条件的理论依据不存在,可能导致预报精度较低问题,将前人改进Verhulst模型的方法应用到滑坡预测预报中,推导出用改进模型和速度最大值判据预报滑坡发生时间的计算公式。通过分析表明,原始Verhulst模型中以速度最大值作为预报滑坡发生时间的判据缺乏合理性,以加速度和加加速度最大值作为预报判据应更合理,并推导出用加速度和加加速度最大值判据预报的计算公式。基于推导的公式,编写Matlab程序进行计算,将原始和改进的Verhulst模型以及3种判据应用于一些滑坡实例的预报中。结果表明,(1)与原始Verhulst模型相比,改进模型的预报效果较好,其预报滑坡发生的时间更早,且更准确;(2)与速度最大值判据相比,加速度和加加速度最大值判据的预报效果较好,其预报时间较早,且较准确;(3)可把原始模型中单一的时间预报值拓展为一段预报的时间范围,该预报时间范围的上限是加速度最大值时刻,下限是加加速度最大值时刻;(4)用改进模型和该时间段范围判据进行预报能起到提前预报的作用,且预报结果较准确。此外,经讨论认为临近破坏时,裂缝的增多以及动摩擦系数小于静摩擦系数导致抗滑力降低,剩余下滑力增大,是使滑体产生加速度逐渐增大运动的原因。

关键词: Verhulst模型, 滑坡预测预报, 判据, 速度, 加速度, 加加速度, 剩余下滑力

Abstract: The Verhulst biological growth model is a kind of statistical forecast model of landslide. According to the problem that there is no theoretical basis of taking the first displacement data as the known condition in the original Verhulst model; and a big error may be caused, the improved Verhulst model that other scholar proposed is firstly applied to the prediction and forecast of landslide. Based on the improved model and velocity maximum criterion, the calculation formula of displacement prediction and time forecast of landslide was deduced. Analysis of forecast results of different forecast criterions is another research content. Theoretical and case study indicates that taking maximum velocity as the forecast criterion of landslide time lacks rationality, and taking maximum of acceleration and accelerated acceleration as the forecast criterion is more in accordance with the mechanism of landslide. Then calculation formulas of forecast time based on the maximum criterion of acceleration and accelerated acceleration were deduced. Based on the deduced formulas above, the original and improved Verhulst model and the three kinds of criterion were applied to the time forecast of some actual landslides that had happened; and MATLAB software was used to calculate the time forecast. The forecast results indicate that, firstly, compared with the forecast results of the original Verhulst model, the forecast results of the improved Verhulst model are better, because the forecast time of improved model is closer to the actual occurrence time of landslide, and earlier than that of original Verhulst model. Secondly, as for the forecast results of three kinds of criterion, the forecast results of the acceleration and accelerated acceleration maximum criterion is better than that of the velocity maximum criterion, because the forecast time of acceleration and accelerated acceleration maximum criterion is closer to the actual occurrence time of landslide, and is earlier than the forecast time of velocity maximum criterion. Thirdly, it is suitable to substitute the single forecast time of the original Verhulst model with a forecast time range, and the upper limit of the rang is forecast time of the acceleration maximum criterion; and the lower limit is forecast time of the accelerated acceleration maximum criterion. Fourthly, the forecast time of the improved Verhulst model and the new time range criterion is more accurate than that of the original model, and it can play a role of early warning. In addition, the decrease of anti-slide force and increase of residual sliding force that is induced by increase of crack and decrease of friction coefficient is the reason why the acceleration of sliding mass increases gradually near failure.

Key words: Verhulst model, landslide forecast, criterion, velocity, acceleration, accelerated acceleration, residual sliding force

中图分类号: 

  • P 642.22
[1] 宋义敏, 张 悦, 许海亮, 王亚飞, 贺志杰. 基于非均匀特征的岩石蠕滑与黏滑变形演化研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 363-371.
[2] 王体强, 王永志, 袁晓铭, 汤兆光, 王海, 段雪锋. 基于振动台试验的加速度积分位移方法可靠性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(S1): 565-573.
[3] 郑青松, 刘恩龙, 刘明星, . 三轴试验下结构面倾角对制备岩样力学特性的影响[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(5): 1854-1861.
[4] 卢华喜, 徐路遥, 梁平英, 吴必涛. 凸起地形对铁路环境振动的影响分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(4): 1561-1568.
[5] 徐 鹏, 蒋关鲁, 邱俊杰, 高泽飞, 王智猛, . 整体刚性面板加筋土挡墙振动台模型试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(3): 998-1004.
[6] 高青鹏, 曹 平, 王 飞, 王 柱. 压剪作用下多节理类岩试样力学性质及破坏判据[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(3): 1013-1022.
[7] 郭 超, 高永涛, 吴顺川, 成子桥, 张诗淮, 韩龙强, . 基于三维快速扫描算法与到时差数据库技术的层状介质震源定位方法研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(3): 1229-1238.
[8] 徐 鹏, 蒋关鲁, 任世杰, 田鸿程, 王智猛, . 红层泥岩及其改良填料路基动力响应试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(2): 678-683.
[9] 高俊丽, 徐宏飞, 曹威, 袁川. 加肋土工膜与砂土拉拔试验及界面细观分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(12): 4668-4674.
[10] 李典庆, 周强, 曹子君, . 基于广义可靠指标相对安全率的岩土工程 设计安全判据[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(10): 3977-3986.
[11] 张晓曦, 何思明, 樊晓一, . L型挡土墙滑裂面确定方法与地震稳定性分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(10): 4011-4020.
[12] 吴红刚, 武志信, 谢显龙, 牌立芳, . 土质边坡微型桩组合结构大型振动台试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(10): 3844-3854.
[13] 许成顺, 豆鹏飞, 高畄成, 陈 苏, 杜修力, . 地震动持时压缩比对可液化地基地震反应 影响的振动台试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(1): 147-155.
[14] 徐 平, 翟攀攀, 张天航, 董新平. 盾构隧道衬砌管片接头弯曲刚度类指数模型研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2018, 39(S2): 83-90.
[15] 王之东, 黎立云, 陈 滔, 刘兵权, . 矿柱岩爆模型试验中能量释放研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2018, 39(S2): 177-185.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 唐明明,王芝银,马兰平,曾志华,张之沛. 油气管道穿越黄土冲沟的管线设计参数研究[J]. , 2010, 31(4): 1314 -1318 .
[2] 林 杭,曹 平,李江腾,江学良,何忠明. 基于Hoek-Brown准则的三维边坡变形稳定性分析[J]. , 2010, 31(11): 3656 -3660 .
[3] 冉 龙,胡 琦. 粉砂地基深基坑渗透破坏研究[J]. , 2009, 30(1): 241 -245 .
[4] 李俊才,纪广强,宋桂华,张 琼,王志亮,严小敏. 高层建筑疏桩筏板基础现场实测与分析[J]. , 2009, 30(4): 1018 -1022 .
[5] 魏 宁,李小春,王 燕,谷志孟. 城市垃圾填埋场甲烷资源量与利用前景[J]. , 2009, 30(6): 1687 -1692 .
[6] 牛文杰,叶为民,刘绍刚,禹海涛. 考虑饱和-非饱和渗流的土坡极限分析[J]. , 2009, 30(8): 2477 -2482 .
[7] 林达明,尚彦军,孙福军,孙元春,吴锋波,刘志强. 岩体强度估算方法研究及应用[J]. , 2011, 32(3): 837 -842 .
[8] 邓东平,李 亮,赵炼恒. 基于Janbu法的边坡整体稳定性滑动面搜索新方法[J]. , 2011, 32(3): 891 -898 .
[9] 吴 剑,冯少孔,李宏阶. 钻孔成像中结构面自动判读技术研究[J]. , 2011, 32(3): 951 -957 .
[10] 李建军,邵生俊,杨扶银,杨春鸣. 防渗墙粗粒土槽孔泥皮的抗渗性试验研究[J]. , 2012, 33(4): 1087 -1093 .