A highway tunnel structural health assessment method and system

Abstract

The present invention provides a highway tunnel structure health evaluation method and system, which belongs to the technical field of highway tunnel maintenance evaluation, and includes the following steps: analyzing the influencing factors of the tunnel structure health state, establishing a highway tunnel structure evaluation index system; calculating the comprehensive weight of each evaluation index based on the obtained tunnel disease database, and for tunnel projects with complete evaluation index information, using the subjective and objective weighting method to determine the comprehensive weight of the evaluation index; for the case where the index information is missing, using the weight coefficient redistribution method, the weight of the missing index is set to zero, the weight is allocated to other indicators according to the remaining proportion, and the original value is added to the allocated value to obtain an updated variable weight; fuzzy operation is performed on the comprehensive weight and the variable weight to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result vector; fuzzy processing is performed on the comprehensive evaluation result vector using the fuzzy vector single value method to obtain the tunnel structure health value. The health evaluation method has stronger applicability and more scientific evaluation results.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention belongs to the technical field of highway tunnel maintenance evaluation, and in particular relates to a highway tunnel structure health evaluation method and system. Background Art

[0002] Since the 21st century, the number and total mileage of highway tunnels in my country have increased rapidly. However, due to factors such as the surrounding environment, usage conditions and construction reasons, operating tunnels have different degrees of defects, such as lining cracks, water leakage, back holes and other defects, which seriously threaten the operational safety of tunnels. The continuous development of defects will not only reduce the service life of the tunnel, but also affect the normal driving of the tunnel. Therefore, how to ensure the solution of tunnel structure safety problems while avoiding the waste of inspection resources has become the focus of current research.

[0003] Compared with other countries, my country's highway tunnel maintenance technology started relatively late, and there is no unified standard for evaluating the health status of operating highway tunnels in the industry. At present, the safety evaluation of highway tunnel structures has the following main shortcomings: (1) The subjective weighting method is used alone to determine the weights of indicators at all levels. It is too subjective and overly dependent on the experience of the evaluators. Different people sometimes get different evaluation results for the same section, which is not conducive to the diagnosis of diseases and causes a waste of detection resources. (2) The existing indicator weighting mainly adopts the constant weight theory, which is unchanging and inconsistent with the actual situation. It cannot be applied to the situation where tunnel disease data is incomplete, and it is impossible to truly and effectively evaluate the health of tunnel structures. (3) The tunnel structure grade is determined according to the maximum membership principle, which cannot fully utilize the membership information of each grade, resulting in a large amount of loss information and sometimes unreasonable evaluation results.

[0004] In summary, the existing highway tunnel health status evaluation method is only applicable to tunnel projects with complete evaluation index information because it only uses the comprehensive weights of each evaluation index obtained by subjective and objective weighting. In addition, the maximum membership method used in it only considers the largest membership value in the comprehensive evaluation vector, which leads to unreasonable evaluation level of tunnel structure. Summary of the invention

[0005] In order to overcome the shortcomings of the above-mentioned prior art, the present invention provides a method and system for evaluating the structural health of a highway tunnel, comprising the following steps:

[0006] Analyze the factors affecting the health status of tunnel structures and build a comprehensive evaluation index system for the health status of highway tunnel structures based on the analysis results;

[0007] Acquire characteristic parameter information of multiple disease sources, and construct a tunnel disease database based on the characteristic parameter information of multiple disease sources;

[0008] The weights of each evaluation index in the comprehensive evaluation index system are calculated based on the data in the tunnel disease database. For tunnel projects with complete evaluation index information, the subjective and objective weighting method is used to determine the comprehensive weights of each evaluation index. For cases where evaluation index information is missing, the weight of the missing evaluation index is set to zero based on the comprehensive weight and the weight of the missing evaluation index is allocated to other evaluation indicators according to the remaining proportion to obtain an updated variable weight.

[0009] Constructing a normal membership function, inputting the characteristic parameters of each evaluation index into the normal membership function, obtaining a comprehensive evaluation matrix, performing fuzzy operation on the comprehensive weight and the variable weight according to the comprehensive evaluation matrix, and obtaining a comprehensive evaluation result vector of each evaluation index;

[0010] The fuzzy vector unification method is used to perform fuzzy processing on the comprehensive evaluation result vector to obtain the tunnel structure health value, and the tunnel structure health level is evaluated based on the health value.

[0011] Preferably, the evaluation index system includes primary evaluation indicators and secondary evaluation indicators. The primary evaluation indicators include lining cracks, water leakage, voids behind the lining, lining material degradation, lining peeling, and bottom drum bulge. The secondary evaluation indicators include crack length, crack width, crack depth ratio, water leakage state, pH value of leakage water, void longitudinal length, void depth, lining thickness ratio, lining strength ratio, peeling depth, peeling diameter, bottom drum cracking length, bottom drum cracking width and bulge displacement.

[0012] Preferably, for a tunnel project with complete evaluation index information, a subjective and objective weighting method is used to determine the comprehensive weight of each evaluation index, including the following steps:

[0013] Use the scaling method to determine the subjective weight of each first-level evaluation indicator;

[0014] Based on the tunnel disease database, the objective weight of each secondary evaluation index is calculated by entropy weight method;

[0015] According to the subjective weight and the objective weight, the comprehensive weight of each evaluation index is calculated by the addition combination method.

[0016] Preferably, constructing a normal membership function comprises the following steps:

[0017] Establish a standard for the classification of highway tunnel structural health levels, and determine the qualitative and quantitative classification standards for each evaluation indicator based on the standard for the classification of structural health levels;

[0018] According to the qualitative and quantitative grading standards of each evaluation index, the normal membership function of each evaluation index is determined by using the minimum fuzzy undetermined coefficient method;

[0019] Preferably, the normal membership function of different levels of each evaluation index is:

[0020] When the indicator is at the lowest level,

[0021] When the indicator is at the highest level,

[0022] When the indicator is at other levels,

[0023] Where M ij (x) is the membership function, x represents the specific value of each secondary evaluation index, and x0 represents the midpoint of the evaluation interval, that is, the clearest point, which satisfies M ij (x0)=1; c is determined by the length of the interval and satisfies c=(d2-d1) / 1.66, where d2 and d1 are the upper and lower limits of the interval respectively.

[0024] Preferably, the comprehensive weight is calculated as follows:

[0025] w″ ij =aw″ ij +(1-a)w′ ij

[0026]

[0027] Among them, w ij is the subjective weight, w′ ij is the objective weight, w″ ij is the comprehensive weight, w q The calculation is performed according to the subjective weights arranged from small to large, where a is the weighting coefficient of the subjective weight and q represents the number of evaluation indicators.

[0028] Preferably, the calculation formula of the updated variable weight is:

[0029]

[0030] In the formula, w il is the initial weight of the remaining indicators, w ik is the weight of the missing indicator.

[0031] Preferably, the calculation formula of the health value is:

[0032]

[0033] In the formula, Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4 are the four comments in the comprehensive evaluation vector.

[0034] Preferably, the highway tunnel structural health grade classification standard is constructed through literature research and reference to tunnel maintenance technical specifications.

[0035] The present invention also provides a highway tunnel structure health assessment system, comprising:

[0036] Evaluation index system determination module, used to analyze the influencing factors of tunnel structure health status, and to establish a comprehensive evaluation index system for highway tunnel structure health status based on the analysis results;

[0037] A disease database construction module is used to obtain characteristic parameter information of multiple disease sources and construct a tunnel disease database based on the characteristic parameter information of multiple disease sources;

[0038] The weight acquisition module is used to calculate the weight of each evaluation index based on the data in the tunnel disease database. For tunnel projects with complete evaluation index information, the subjective and objective weighting method is used to determine the comprehensive weight of each evaluation index. For the case where the evaluation index information is missing, the weight of the missing evaluation index is set to zero based on the comprehensive weight and the weight of the missing evaluation index is allocated to other evaluation indicators according to the remaining proportion to obtain the updated variable weight.

[0039] An evaluation vector acquisition module is used to construct a normal membership function, input the characteristic parameters of each evaluation index into the normal membership function, obtain a comprehensive evaluation matrix, perform fuzzy operation on the comprehensive weight and variable weight according to the comprehensive evaluation matrix, and obtain a comprehensive evaluation result vector of each evaluation index;

[0040] The health evaluation module is used to perform fuzzy processing on the comprehensive evaluation result vector by using the fuzzy vector unaryization method to obtain the tunnel structure health value, and evaluate the tunnel structure health level according to the health value.

[0041] The highway tunnel structure health assessment method provided by the present invention has the following beneficial effects:

[0042] On the basis of determining the comprehensive weights by the subjective and objective weighting method, the present invention proposes a method for redistributing weight coefficients to obtain variable weights suitable for incomplete disease index information, so that the constructed tunnel structure health evaluation method has stronger applicability; by using the constructed normal membership function, fuzzy operations can be performed on the comprehensive weights and variable weights to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result vector of each evaluation index; by adopting the fuzzy vector univalence method to perform fuzzy processing on the comprehensive evaluation result vector, the membership information of each level can be fully utilized, thereby obtaining the tunnel structure health value, and the tunnel structure health level is evaluated according to the health value, so that the evaluation result is more scientific. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0043] In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiment of the present invention and its design scheme, the following briefly introduces the drawings required for this embodiment. The drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative work.

[0044] Figure 1 is an evaluation flow chart of the method of the present invention;

[0045] Figure 2 It is an evaluation index system diagram of the method of the present invention;

[0046] Figure 3 It is the weight coefficient redistribution flow chart;

[0047] Figure 4 is the membership function graph of crack length;

[0048] Figure 5 It is the membership function diagram of the leakage water state. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0049] In order to enable those skilled in the art to better understand the technical solution of the present invention and implement it, the present invention is described in detail below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments. The following embodiments are only used to more clearly illustrate the technical solution of the present invention, and cannot be used to limit the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0050] Example

[0051] The present invention provides a method for evaluating the structural health of a highway tunnel, specifically Figure 1 , including the following steps:

[0052] Step 1: Analyze the main influencing factors of tunnel structure health status and determine the comprehensive evaluation index system of highway tunnel structure health status.

[0053] The factors affecting the health status of tunnel structure were analyzed. Six diseases, including lining cracks, water seepage, voids behind lining, lining material deterioration, lining peeling, and floor heave, were taken as the first-level evaluation indicators. Fourteen characteristic parameters, including crack length, crack width, crack depth ratio, water seepage status, pH value of water seepage, void longitudinal length, void depth, lining thickness ratio, lining strength ratio, peeling depth, peeling diameter, floor heave crack length, floor heave crack width, and heave displacement, were taken as the second-level evaluation indicators. For details, see Figure 2 .

[0054] Step 2: Through literature review and field investigation, obtain characteristic parameter information of multiple disease sources and build a database of different types of tunnel diseases in China.

[0055] Step 3: Establish the classification standard of highway tunnel structure health level, and determine the qualitative and quantitative classification standards of each evaluation index according to the classification standard of structure health level.

[0056] In terms of the classification of tunnel structure health levels, the three-level classification method is prone to the problem of too large a classification span, which cannot correctly reflect the safety status of the tunnel structure; the five-level classification method is prone to the problem of too small a classification span, and there are few cases of no disease in actual tunnel projects. In view of this, the present invention adopts a four-level classification method to divide the tunnel structure health status into four levels, namely level 1 (healthy or slightly damaged), level 2 (general damage), level 3 (more serious damage) and level 4 (severe damage); the specific meaning of each level is shown in Table 1. The level classification standards of each evaluation index are shown in Tables 2 to 7.

[0057] Table 1 Health grade classification standards for highway tunnels in my country

[0058]

[0059] Table 2 Lining crack disease classification standards

[0060] Rating Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Crack length / m 0～3 3～5 5～10 ＞10 Crack width / mm 0～1 1～3 3～5 ＞5 Relative crack depth 0～1 / 6 1 / 6～1 / 3 1 / 3～1 / 2 1 / 2～1

[0061] Table 3 Water leakage damage classification standards

[0062] Rating Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 PH value of leakage water 6.0～7.9 5.0～6.0 4.0～5.0 0～4.0 Water leakage status Impregnation Hourglass Surge injection

[0063] Table 4 Classification standard of void damage behind lining

[0064] Rating Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Depth / m 0～0.1 0.1～0.3 0.3～0.5 ＞0.5 Longitudinal length / m 0～1 1～5 5～10 ＞10

[0065] Table 5 Classification standards for lining peeling disease

[0066] Rating Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Peeling depth / mm 0～6 6～12 12～25 ＞25 Peeling diameter / mm 0～50 50～75 75～150 ＞150

[0067] Table 6 Classification standard of lining material deterioration

[0068] Rating 1 2 3 4 Concrete strength ratio 0.9～1 0.65～0.9 0.5～0.65 0～0.5 Concrete thickness ratio 0.85～1 0.67～0.85 0.5～0.67 0～0.5

[0069] Table 7 Classification standards for bottom drum heave disease

[0070] Rating Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Crack length / m 0～1 1～3 3～5 ＞5 Crack width / mm 0～1 1～3 3～5 ＞5 Uplift displacement / mm 0～6 6～12 12～48 ＞48

[0071] Step 4: According to the qualitative and quantitative grading standards of each evaluation index, the normal membership function of each evaluation index is determined using the minimum fuzzy coefficient method.

[0072] The membership function method can calculate the membership of a certain disease to a certain level, and then select the maximum membership from the calculated memberships to obtain the evaluation level of the disease. At present, there are many forms of membership functions, including triangular distribution, Cauchy distribution, normal distribution and other membership functions. Since the critical point of the grading interval of the membership function of the normal distribution can achieve a smooth transition, and when the index value is at the critical point of the grading interval, the membership of the index to the two adjacent evaluation levels is 0.5, therefore, the present invention uses the membership function of the normal distribution to calculate the membership of the evaluation index.

[0073] The steps for constructing the membership functions of different levels of each evaluation index are as follows;

[0074] When the indicator is at the lowest level,

[0075]

[0076] When the indicator is at the highest level,

[0077]

[0078] When the indicator is at other levels,

[0079]

[0080] Where M ij (x) is the membership function, x represents the specific value of each secondary evaluation index, and x0 represents the midpoint of the evaluation interval, that is, the clearest point, which satisfies M ij (x0)=1; c is determined by the length of the interval and satisfies c=(d2-d1) / 1.66, where d2 and d1 are the upper and lower limits of the interval respectively.

[0081] For quantitative indicators, the boundary point of the evaluation interval is selected as the most fuzzy point, and the membership degree of the indicator belonging to two adjacent evaluation levels at this point is 0.5; the midpoint of the evaluation interval is the clearest point, and the membership function value of this point is 1;

[0082] For qualitative indicators, the evaluation interval is divided into four equal parts, and the degree of disease is represented by numbers from 0 to 1. The membership function of qualitative indicators is constructed according to the membership function construction method of quantitative indicators.

[0083] Step 5: Calculate the weight of each evaluation index in the comprehensive evaluation index system based on the data in the tunnel disease database. For tunnel projects with complete evaluation index information, the subjective and objective weighting method is used to determine the comprehensive weight of each evaluation index. For cases where evaluation index information is missing, the weight of the missing evaluation index is set to zero based on the comprehensive weight, and the weight of the missing evaluation index is allocated to other evaluation indicators according to the remaining proportion to obtain the updated variable weight. For details, see Figure 3 , including the following steps:

[0084] Step 5.1: For tunnel projects with complete indicator information, the subjective and objective weighting method is used to determine the comprehensive weights of the evaluation indicators.

[0085] In the pairwise comparison between the evaluation indicators, considering that the 1-9 scale method has unreasonable scale (obviously large: slightly large < slightly large: the same) when judging "slightly larger" and "obviously larger", the present invention determines the subjective weight of the disease evaluation indicator according to the 9 / 9-9 / 1 scale method (see Table 8);

[0086] Table 8 9 / 9~9 / 1 scaling method

[0087] Numeric 9 / 9 9 / 7 9 / 5 9 / 3 9 / 1 importance same Slightly larger Obviously large Strong Extremely large

[0088] The judgment matrix is ​​obtained from the above comparison results. The judgment matrix is ​​normalized by column to obtain the matrix A′. The weight vector is obtained by summing and normalizing A′ by row, and the weight vector is checked for consistency.

[0089] Among them, the maximum eigenvalue λ of the judgment matrix required in the consistency test is max , calculate the consistency index CI, look up Table 9 to determine the average random consistency index RI, calculate the consistency ratio CR, if CR≤0.1, the consistency test passes, otherwise the judgment matrix needs to be adjusted to make CR meet the requirements.

[0090] The maximum eigenvalue of the judgment matrix λ max The calculation formula is:

[0091] In the formula, A is the judgment matrix, W is the weight of each evaluation index, w is the weight vector of each evaluation index, and m is the number of evaluation indicators.

[0092] The calculation formula of consistency index CI is:

[0093] The calculation formula of consistency ratio CR is:

[0094] Table 9 Average random consistency index RI value table

[0095] Matrix order 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 RI 0 0 0.52 0.89 1.12 1.26 1.36 1.41 1.46

[0096] Based on the tunnel disease database constructed in step 1, the objective weight of each evaluation index is calculated by the entropy weight method;

[0097] Among them, data normalization processing is divided into two categories: positive indicators and negative indicators:

[0098] Negative indicators (the smaller the value, the safer the structure):

[0099] Positive indicators (the larger the value, the safer the structure):

[0100] The first-level evaluation index cannot calculate the entropy weight between indicators, so it is determined according to the weight obtained by the hierarchical analysis method; the second-level evaluation index needs to calculate the comprehensive weight of each evaluation index through the addition combination method, and the calculation formula is as follows:

[0101] w″ ij =aw ij +(1-a)w′ ij

[0102]

[0103] Among them, w ij is the subjective weight, w′ ij is the objective weight, w″ ij is the comprehensive weight, w q Calculate according to subjective weights arranged from small to large;

[0104] Step 5.2: In the case of missing indicator information, the updated variable weight is calculated using the weight coefficient redistribution method;

[0105] The weight of the missing indicator is set to zero, and the weight is allocated to other indicators according to the remaining proportion. The original value is added to the allocated value to get the updated weight value. The calculation formula is as follows;

[0106]

[0107] In the formula, w il is the initial weight of the remaining indicators, w ik is the weight of the missing indicator.

[0108] Step 6: Input the characteristic parameters of each evaluation index into the normal membership function to obtain a comprehensive evaluation matrix, perform fuzzy operation on the comprehensive weight and variable weight according to the comprehensive evaluation matrix, and obtain a comprehensive evaluation result vector of each evaluation index; use the fuzzy vector single-value method to perform fuzzy processing on the comprehensive evaluation result vector to obtain the tunnel structure health value, and evaluate the tunnel structure health level according to the health value.

[0109] The present invention evaluates the health level of the tunnel structure by introducing a fuzzy vector unification method, comprehensively considering the membership information of each evaluation level, and calculating the tunnel structure health value S, thereby avoiding the defects of the maximum membership principle and ensuring the reliability of the evaluation results. The calculation formula of the health value is as follows:

[0110]

[0111] In the formula, Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4 are the four comments in the comprehensive evaluation vector.

[0112] The classification table of tunnel structure health value S is shown in Table 10.

[0113] Table 10 Classification table of tunnel structure health value S

[0114] Tunnel grade Health value S Tunnel structure status Level 1 3.5＜S≤4 Healthy or slightly damaged Level 2 2.5＜S≤3.5 General damage Level 3 1.5＜S≤2.5 More serious damage Level 4 1＜S≤1.5 Severe damage

[0115] The following is a specific example to verify a highway tunnel structure health assessment method and system provided by the present invention. The specific steps are as follows:

[0116] 1. By collecting the disease data of operating highway tunnels, a tunnel disease database was established, and 14 characteristic parameters were selected as evaluation indicators, namely crack length, crack width, crack depth ratio, leakage water state, leakage water pH value, void longitudinal length, void depth, lining thickness ratio, lining strength ratio, spalling depth, spalling diameter, bottom drum cracking length, bottom drum cracking width, and uplift displacement.

[0117] Table 11 shows the development of disease in a section of Nanyangshan Tunnel:

[0118] Table 11 Disease data of a section of Nanyangshan Tunnel

[0119]

[0120] 2. Determine the judgment matrix of the first-level evaluation indicators according to the 9 / 9 to 9 / 1 scaling method;

[0121]

[0122] Among them, x ij is the importance of the i-th disease relative to the j-th disease, i and j represent the types of diseases, respectively, and x1, x2, x3, x4, x5, and x6 represent lining cracks, water leakage, voids behind the lining, lining peeling, lining material deterioration, and bottom bulge.

[0123] The judgment matrix A is summed up by columns and normalized to obtain a new judgment matrix A′, and the judgment matrix A′ is summed up by rows and normalized to obtain a weight vector;

[0124] w=(0.1875 0.1659 0.1659 0.1466 0.1466 0.1875)

[0125] Similarly, the weight vectors of other indicators can be obtained:

[0126] w1=(0.293 0.375 0.332), w2=(0.44 0.56), w3=(0.6 0.4), w4=(0.5 0.5)

[0127] w5=(0.6 0.4), w6=(0.28 0.36 0.36)

[0128] 3. Use the entropy weight method to allocate the weights of the secondary evaluation indicators. The quantitative value and qualitative description of each disease are used as the evaluation value, such as lining crack length, water leakage status, etc., to construct an evaluation matrix and calculate the objective weight of the evaluation indicators.

[0129] w′1=(0.257 0.4 0.343), w′2=(0.428 0.72), w′3=(0.634 0.366), w′4=(0.531 0.469)

[0130] w′5=(0.52 0.48), w′6=(0.3 0.33 0.37)

[0131] 4. The present invention adopts the addition combination method to determine the comprehensive weight of the secondary evaluation index, and the calculation formula is as follows:

[0132] w′ ij =aw ij +(1-a)w′ ij

[0133]

[0134] Among them, w ij is the subjective weight, w′ ij is the objective weight, w q The calculation is performed according to the subjective weights arranged from small to large, where a is the weighting coefficient of the subjective weight and q represents the number of evaluation indicators.

[0135] Taking the secondary evaluation index of crack disease as an example,

[0136]

[0137] w″ 11 =aw 11 +(1-a)w′ 11 =0.749×0.293+(1-0.749)×0.257=0.284

[0138] According to the above formula, the comprehensive weight determined by the present invention is shown in Table 12.

[0139] Table 12 Comprehensive weight of evaluation index system

[0140]

[0141] 5. As the disease data of this section of Nanyangshan Tunnel is missing, it is necessary to update and optimize the comprehensive weights. The weights of the missing indicators are set to zero, and the weights are allocated to other indicators according to the remaining proportions. The original values ​​are added to the allocated values ​​to obtain the updated weight values.

[0142] The crack length weight coefficient is:

[0143] The crack width weight coefficient is:

[0144] The weight coefficient of leakage water state is: 1;

[0145] The weight coefficient of the bottom drum cracking length is:

[0146] The weight coefficient of bottom drum crack width is:

[0147] The weight vector of the first-level evaluation index is: W = (0.22 0.194 0.194 0.172 0.22)

[0148] Weight vectors for other indicators:

[0149] W′1=(0.427 0.573), W′2=(1), W′3=(0.627 0.373), W′4=(0.536 0.464), W′5=(0.447 0.553)

[0150] 6. Determine the normal distribution membership function of each evaluation index.

[0151] like Figure 4 and Figure 5 As shown, Figure 4 is the membership function graph of crack length; Figure 5 It is the membership function diagram of the leakage state. Taking the leakage state as an example, the membership function expression of the leakage state is as follows:

[0152]

[0153] 7. Construct a tunnel structure health evaluation model, and substitute the disease data of a section of Nanyangshan Tunnel collected in step 1 into the membership function expression corresponding to each evaluation index, calculate the evaluation matrix of the first-level evaluation index, see Table 13, and obtain the evaluation results of the highway tunnel structure health status;

[0154] Table 13. Evaluation matrix P of first-level evaluation index u With the comprehensive weight vector w u

[0155]

[0156]

[0157] 8. Calculate the comprehensive evaluation matrix and comprehensive evaluation vector of the target layer;

[0158] Calculate the comprehensive evaluation matrix P of the target layer of the section to be evaluated;

[0159]

[0160] The weight vector of the first-level evaluation index is: G = (0.22 0.194 0.172 0.194 0.22)

[0161] The comprehensive evaluation vector of the target layer is: T = G·P = (0.464 0.134 0.281 0.121)

[0162] 9. Analysis of fuzzy comprehensive evaluation results;

[0163] If the maximum membership method is used to perform fuzzy processing on the final evaluation vector, the results show that the lining structure health level of this section of Nanyangshan Tunnel is level 1, while the inspection report of Nanyangshan Tunnel shows that there is general damage in this section, which is inconsistent with the actual situation;

[0164] The present invention converts the comprehensive evaluation vector T into a single value, comprehensively considers the membership information of the four levels, and obtains a more accurate and scientific evaluation result. The calculation method of the tunnel safety value S is as follows:

[0165] S=4Q1+3Q2+2Q3+Q4

[0166] In the formula, Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4 are the four comments in the comprehensive evaluation vector.

[0167] Calculate the tunnel structure health value S = 4 × 0.464 + 3 × 0.134 + 2 × 0.281 + 0.121 = 2.94

[0168] According to Table 10, the structural grade of this section of Nanyangshan Tunnel is Level 2, with general damage, which is consistent with the actual structural state of the tunnel. Key monitoring should be carried out on the damaged parts of the structure, and local maintenance and repair should be carried out.

[0169] The embodiments described above are only preferred specific implementation modes of the present invention, and the protection scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. Any simple changes or equivalent replacements of the technical solutions that can be obviously obtained by any technician familiar with the field within the technical scope disclosed in the present invention belong to the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the structural health of a highway tunnel, characterized in that: The steps include: Analyze the factors affecting the health status of tunnel structures and build a comprehensive evaluation index system for the health status of highway tunnel structures based on the analysis results; Acquire characteristic parameter information of multiple disease sources, and construct a tunnel disease database based on the characteristic parameter information of multiple disease sources; The weights of each evaluation index in the comprehensive evaluation index system are calculated based on the data in the tunnel disease database. For tunnel projects with complete evaluation index information, the subjective and objective weighting method is used to determine the comprehensive weights of each evaluation index. For cases where evaluation index information is missing, the weights of the missing evaluation indexes are allocated to other evaluation indexes according to the remaining proportions based on the comprehensive weights. The original values ​​are added to the allocated values ​​to obtain the updated weight values. After the allocation is completed, the weights of the missing evaluation indicators are set to zero. Constructing a normal membership function, inputting the characteristic parameters of each evaluation index into the normal membership function, obtaining a comprehensive evaluation matrix, performing fuzzy operation on the comprehensive weight and the variable weight according to the comprehensive evaluation matrix, and obtaining a comprehensive evaluation result vector of each evaluation index; The fuzzy vector unification method is used to perform fuzzy processing on the comprehensive evaluation result vector to obtain the tunnel structure health value, and the tunnel structure health level is evaluated according to the health value; Constructing a normal membership function includes the following steps: Establish a standard for the classification of highway tunnel structural health levels, and determine the qualitative and quantitative classification standards for each evaluation indicator based on the standard for the classification of structural health levels; According to the qualitative and quantitative grading standards of each evaluation index, the normal membership function of each evaluation index is determined by using the minimum fuzzy undetermined coefficient method; The normal membership function of different levels of each evaluation index is: When the evaluation index is at the lowest level, When the evaluation index is at the highest level, When the evaluation index is at other levels, Where M ij (x) is the membership function, x represents the specific value of each secondary evaluation index, and x0 represents the midpoint of the evaluation interval, that is, the clearest point, which satisfies M ij (x0)=1; c is determined by the length of the interval and satisfies c=(d2-d1) / 1.66, where d2 and d1 are the upper and lower limits of the interval respectively.

2. The method for evaluating the structural health of a highway tunnel according to claim 1, characterized in that: The evaluation index system includes primary evaluation indicators and secondary evaluation indicators. The primary evaluation indicators include lining cracks, water leakage, voids behind the lining, lining material degradation, lining peeling, and bottom drum bulge. The secondary evaluation indicators include crack length, crack width, crack depth ratio, water leakage status, pH value of leakage water, void longitudinal length, void depth, lining thickness ratio, lining strength ratio, peeling depth, peeling diameter, bottom drum cracking length, bottom drum cracking width and bulge displacement.

3. The method for evaluating the structural health of a highway tunnel according to claim 2, characterized in that: For tunnel projects with complete evaluation index information, the subjective and objective weighting method is used to determine the comprehensive weight of each evaluation index, including the following steps: Use the scaling method to determine the subjective weight of each first-level evaluation indicator; Based on the tunnel disease database, the objective weight of each secondary evaluation index is calculated by entropy weight method; According to the subjective weight and the objective weight, the comprehensive weight of each evaluation index is calculated by the addition combination method.

4. The method for evaluating the structural health of a highway tunnel according to claim 1, characterized in that: The calculation method of the comprehensive weight is: wi′j′=awij+(1-a)wi′j ″′ Among them, w ij is the subjective weight, w ij is the objective weight, w ij is the comprehensive weight, w q The calculation is performed according to the subjective weights arranged from small to large, where a is the weighting coefficient of the subjective weight and q represents the number of evaluation indicators.

5. The method for evaluating the structural health of a highway tunnel according to claim 1, characterized in that: The calculation formula of the variable weight is: In the formula, w il is the initial weight of the remaining indicators, w ik is the weight of the missing indicator.

6. The method for evaluating the structural health of a highway tunnel according to claim 1, characterized in that: The calculation formula of the health value is: In the formula, Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4 are the four comments in the comprehensive evaluation vector.

7. The method for evaluating the structural health of a highway tunnel according to claim 1, characterized in that: The highway tunnel structural health grade classification standard is constructed through literature research and reference to tunnel maintenance technical specifications.

8. A highway tunnel structural health assessment system, characterized in that: include: Evaluation index system determination module, used to analyze the influencing factors of tunnel structure health status, and to establish a comprehensive evaluation index system for highway tunnel structure health status based on the analysis results; A disease database construction module is used to obtain characteristic parameter information of multiple disease sources and construct a tunnel disease database based on the characteristic parameter information of multiple disease sources; The weight acquisition module is used to calculate the weight of each evaluation index based on the data in the tunnel disease database. For tunnel projects with complete evaluation index information, the subjective and objective weighting method is used to determine the comprehensive weight of each evaluation index. For the case where the evaluation index information is missing, the weight of the missing evaluation index is allocated to other evaluation indicators according to the remaining proportion on the basis of the comprehensive weight, and the original value is added to the allocated value to obtain the updated weight value. After the allocation is completed, the weight of the missing evaluation index is set to zero; An evaluation vector acquisition module is used to construct a normal membership function, input the characteristic parameters of each evaluation index into the normal membership function, obtain a comprehensive evaluation matrix, perform fuzzy operation on the comprehensive weight and variable weight according to the comprehensive evaluation matrix, and obtain a comprehensive evaluation result vector of each evaluation index; A health evaluation module is used to perform fuzzy processing on the comprehensive evaluation result vector by using a fuzzy vector unaryization method to obtain a tunnel structure health value, and to evaluate the tunnel structure health level according to the health value; The construction of the normal membership function is specifically as follows: Establish a standard for the classification of highway tunnel structural health levels, and determine the qualitative and quantitative classification standards for each evaluation indicator based on the standard for the classification of structural health levels; According to the qualitative and quantitative grading standards of each evaluation index, the normal membership function of each evaluation index is determined by using the minimum fuzzy undetermined coefficient method; The normal membership function of different levels of each evaluation index is: When the evaluation index is at the lowest level, When the evaluation index is at the highest level, When the evaluation index is at other levels, Where M ij (x) is the membership function, x represents the specific value of each secondary evaluation index, and x0 represents the midpoint of the evaluation interval, that is, the clearest point, which satisfies M ij (x0)=1; c is determined by the length of the interval and satisfies c=(d2-d1) / 1.66, where d2 and d1 are the upper and lower limits of the interval respectively.

Images