Quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair scheme of hydraulic structure based on historical case data

Abstract

The invention provides a hydraulic structure typical defect repair scheme quantitative decision-making method based on historical case data, and relates to the field of hydraulic structure defect repair scheme decision-making. According to the method, on the basis of historical repair case data of typical defects of the hydraulic structure, a defect classification and grading standard and a repair process material evaluation standard are established after data structural hierarchy processing, repair scheme characteristics and comprehensive weights are considered, and a repair scheme quantitative decision model based on an entropy weight method and considering the comprehensive weights is constructed; and after defect feature information is input, automatic generation of a defect repair scheme is realized. According to the method, a scientific and reasonable repair scheme can be output for typical defects of the hydraulic structure, and the method can be further popularized and applied to decision making of defect repair schemes of other types of hydraulic structures.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the field of decision-making on hydraulic structure defect repair schemes, and in particular to a quantitative decision-making method for hydraulic structure typical defect repair schemes based on historical case data. Background Art

[0002] Reservoir dams are important infrastructure for ensuring water safety, and they undertake important tasks such as flood control, water supply, irrigation, power generation, and shipping. After a long period of operation, hydraulic structures in water conservancy and hydropower projects inevitably suffer from defects such as erosion, wear, cracks, leakage, and carbonization. In order to prevent the defects from further deteriorating and affecting the safe operation of the project and the realization of economic benefits, it is necessary to repair the defects.

[0003] There are many materials and processes for repairing defects in hydraulic structures. The use conditions and implementation effects of different repair schemes vary greatly. There has been no systematic compilation and analysis of typical defect cases of hydraulic structures at home and abroad. Decisions on defect repair schemes are made only based on the experience of engineers. There is a lack of a complete and systematic decision-making system for typical defect repair schemes for hydraulic structures. There is a lack of quantification of various evaluation indicators such as performance, complexity, convenience, safety, economy, durability and environmental protection of repair materials and processes, and a systematic evaluation standard and decision-making system have not yet been established. Summary of the invention

[0004] In order to overcome the shortcomings of the above-mentioned technology, the present invention provides a quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair schemes of hydraulic structures based on historical case data. The present invention proposes a quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair schemes of hydraulic structures based on historical case data through data statistical analysis and induction and summary, and realizes automatic output of scientific and reasonable repair schemes for typical defects of hydraulic structures.

[0005] In order to realize the above technical features, the object of the present invention is achieved as follows: a quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair schemes of hydraulic structures based on historical case data comprises the following steps: Step 1: Analyze and organize the historical repair case data of typical defects of hydraulic structures, build a structured hierarchy of "buildings, working conditions, defects, repair materials and processes", and perform structured processing on the case data to generate a structured database; Step 2: Construct a classification standard for typical defects and classify the typical defects; Step 3: Construct a repair solution evaluation standard and conduct quantitative evaluation of typical defect repair solutions; Step 4: Consider the characteristics and comprehensive weights of the repair plan, and build a quantitative decision model for defect repair plans based on the entropy weight method; Step 5: In actual applications, input defect feature information, make decisions on the necessity and urgency of defect repair, sort the defect repair solutions, and output the optimal defect repair solution.

[0006] Preferably, in step 1, the structured hierarchy is a tree structure, and a case data structured database is formed after structuring processing.

[0007] Preferably, in step 2, typical defects include breakage, erosion, cracks, and leakage. According to the characteristics of the defects and their impact on the safety of hydraulic structures, the typical defects are classified and graded taking into account factors such as the difficulty of repair, the level of repair work, the recurrence, the hazard of not repairing, and the specificity of repair.

[0008] Preferably, the evaluation standard of the repair scheme in step 3 is a quantitative evaluation standard based on the NGT method, which takes into account the repair effect, convenience, mechanical properties of materials, environmental friendliness of materials, and economic performance of materials of the repair scheme, and quantitatively assigns values ​​to the repair scheme.

[0009] Preferably, the range of variation of the grading of the quantitative index of the evaluation standard based on the NGT method is 0 to 10, which is divided into 4 levels, and the range of variation of each level is [0, 2.5].

[0010] Preferably, the quantitative decision model for the repair scheme in step 4 is a repair material decision model based on the entropy weight method and taking comprehensive weights into consideration, and the repair schemes are ranked according to the comprehensive attribute degrees.

[0011] Preferably, the comprehensive weight coefficient of the quantitative decision model of the repair solution is: (1); Where: is the comprehensive weight coefficient; is the subjective weight of experts for each indicator; w j is the entropy weight of each evaluation index; The comprehensive attribute degree formula is: (2); Where: is the comprehensive attribute degree; is the comprehensive weight of each evaluation index; Assign values ​​to the evaluation indicators after standardization.

[0012] Preferably, the repair necessity and urgency decision in step 5 considers defect level, environment, appearance requirements and factors affecting safety to determine the necessity and urgency decision principle.

[0013] Preferably, the repair decision principles include three categories: necessary repair but not urgent, necessary repair and urgent, and no repair.

[0014] Preferably, in step 5, after the defect feature information is input, the repair solution quantitative decision model calculates the comprehensive attribute degree of each repair solution and sorts them, and outputs the optimal repair solution.

[0015] The present invention has the following beneficial effects: 1. The present invention constructs a structured hierarchy of "buildings, working conditions, defects, repair materials and processes" by systematically analyzing historical case data to generate a structured database.

[0016] 2. The present invention proposes a defect classification and grading standard based on defect characteristics and their impact on safety, as well as a quantitative evaluation standard for repair materials based on the NGT method, to achieve quantitative processing of characteristic factors of repair solutions.

[0017] 3. The present invention proposes a decision-making principle of necessity and urgency that takes into account factors such as defect level, environment, appearance requirements, and impact on safety, and constructs a quantitative decision-making model for repair plans based on the entropy weight method that takes into account comprehensive weights. It automatically outputs scientific and reasonable repair plans, which can be further promoted and applied to the decision-making of defect repair plans for hydraulic structures, greatly improving the maintenance and inspection level and emergency repair capabilities of hydraulic structures, and has broad practical application value. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0018] The present invention will be further described below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and embodiments.

[0019] Figure 1 The present invention is a workflow diagram of a quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair schemes of hydraulic structures based on historical case data.

[0020] Figure 2 The figure is a flow chart of the quantitative decision-making model of the repair scheme based on the entropy weight method and considering the comprehensive weight in the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0021] The technical solution of the present invention is further described below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and embodiments. Obviously, the described embodiments are only a part of the embodiments of the present invention, rather than all the embodiments.

[0022] Embodiment 1: The present invention provides a quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair schemes of hydraulic structures based on historical case data for decision-making on damage defect repair schemes. The specific working process is as follows: Figure 1 As shown, the following steps are included: Step 1: Analyze and organize the historical repair case data of hydraulic structure damage defects, construct a structured hierarchy of "buildings, working conditions, defects, repair materials and processes", and perform structured processing on the case data to generate a structured form. In the form, the repair solutions for damage defects include epoxy mortar, polymer mortar, epoxy putty, pre-shrink mortar, high-strength mortar, acrylic mortar, etc.

[0023] As a preferred technical solution of the present invention, in step 1, the structured hierarchy is a tree structure, and a case data structured database is formed after structuring processing.

[0024] Step 2: Construct a classification standard for damage defects and classify the damage defects.

[0025] As a preferred technical solution of the present invention, in step 2, factors such as the difficulty of repair, the level of repair work, recurrence, the harm of not repairing, and the particularity of repair are taken into consideration, and the defects are divided into four levels: A, B, C, and D according to the depth and area of ​​the damage defects and their impact on the safety of hydraulic structures.

[0026] Step 3: Construct a quantitative evaluation standard for repair solutions and conduct quantitative evaluation of typical defect repair solutions.

[0027] As a preferred technical solution of the present invention, in step 3, the evaluation standard of the repair scheme is a quantitative evaluation standard based on the NGT method, which quantitatively assigns values ​​to indicators such as the repair effect, convenience, mechanical properties of materials, environmental friendliness of materials, and economic efficiency of materials. The range of variation of the quantitative index classification of the evaluation standard based on the NGT method is 0 to 10, with a total of 4 levels, and the range of variation of each level is [0,2.5]. The indicator evaluation of the damage defect repair scheme in the case is shown in Table 1 below.

[0028] Table 1 Evaluation index of damage defect repair scheme

[0029] Step 4: Considering the characteristics and comprehensive weights of the repair plan, a quantitative decision model for defect repair plans based on the entropy weight method is constructed.

[0030] As a preferred technical solution of the present invention, the quantitative decision model of the repair scheme is a repair material decision model based on the entropy weight method and considering the comprehensive weight, such as Figure 2 After assigning evaluation indicators to various repair schemes based on the repair process and material evaluation standards, the evaluation indicator level matrix is ​​constructed. R `.

[0031] After standardizing the evaluation index level matrix, the level standard matrix is ​​generated R , the evaluation index assignment formula after standardization is as follows: ; Where: Assign values ​​to the evaluation indicators.

[0032] In the horizontal standard matrix R On this basis, the entropy value and entropy weight of the indicators are calculated, and the subjective weight of the experts is fully considered. The entropy weight method is modified to obtain the comprehensive weight coefficient formula as follows: ; Where: is the subjective weight of each indicator expert, ; w j is the entropy weight of each evaluation index.

[0033] The formula for calculating the comprehensive attribute degree of the repair solution by the decision model of the present invention is as follows: ; Where: is the comprehensive weight of each evaluation index; Assign values ​​to the evaluation indicators after standardization.

[0034] The evaluation index assignment and comprehensive weight coefficient of the damage defect repair plan after standardized processing in the case are shown in Tables 2 and 3 below.

[0035] Table 2 Evaluation index assignment of standardized post-processing damage defect repair scheme

[0036] Table 3 Comprehensive weight coefficients of various repair schemes

[0037] Step 5: Input defect feature information, make a decision on the necessity and urgency of repair, sort the defect repair plans, and output the defect repair plans.

[0038] As the preferred technical solution of the present invention, the decision on the necessity and urgency of repair takes into account factors such as defect level, environment, appearance requirements, impact on safety, etc., and determines the necessity and urgency decision-making principle, including three categories: necessary repair but not urgent, necessary repair and urgent, and no repair.

[0039] The present invention sorts according to the size of the comprehensive attribute degree. The larger the comprehensive attribute degree value, the better the rationality of the repair scheme. By quantitatively assigning values ​​to the repair effect, mechanical properties, environmental protection, economy, convenience and other indicators of the damage defect repair scheme, and introducing the subjective weight of experts, the comprehensive attribute degree of each scheme is shown in Table 4 below.

[0040] Table 4 Comprehensive attribute degree of each scheme

[0041] It can be seen from Table 4 that the epoxy mortar repair scheme is the best. The results show that the method of the present invention can make decisions on the repair scheme according to the characteristics of the repair scheme and the expert supervisor weights, and output the optimal repair scheme.

[0042] Embodiment 2: The present invention provides a quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair schemes of hydraulic structures based on historical case data for decision-making on crack defect repair schemes. The specific working process is as follows: Figure 1 As shown, the following steps are included: Step 1: Analyze and organize the historical repair case data of crack defects in hydraulic structures, construct a structured hierarchy of "buildings, working conditions, defects, repair materials and processes", and perform structured processing on the case data to generate a structured form. In the form, the crack defect repair solutions include polyurethane grouting, ultra-fine cement grouting, epoxy grouting, formaldehyde grouting, acrylate grouting, cement grouting, etc.

[0043] As a preferred technical solution of the present invention, in step 1, the structured hierarchy is a tree structure, and a case data structured database is formed after structuring processing.

[0044] Step 2: Construct a typical defect classification standard and classify the typical defects.

[0045] As a preferred technical solution of the present invention, in step 2, factors such as repair difficulty, level of repair work, recurrence, harm of not repairing, and repair specificity are taken into consideration, and crack defects are divided into four levels: A, B, C, and D according to crack width, depth, and characteristics.

[0046] Step 3: Construct a quantitative evaluation standard for repair solutions and conduct quantitative evaluation of typical defect repair solutions.

[0047] As a preferred technical solution of the present invention, in step 3, the evaluation standard of the repair scheme is a quantitative evaluation standard based on the NGT method, which quantitatively assigns values ​​to the repair effect, convenience, mechanical properties of materials, environmental friendliness of materials, and economic efficiency of materials. The range of variation of the quantitative index classification of the evaluation standard based on the NGT method is 0 to 10, with a total of 4 levels, and the range of variation of each level is [0,2.5]. The index evaluation of the crack defect repair scheme in the case is shown in Table 5 below.

[0048] Table 5 Index evaluation of crack defect repair scheme in the case

[0049] Step 4: Based on the case data, a quantitative decision-making model for repair solutions is constructed to rank the defect repair process materials.

[0050] As a preferred technical solution of the present invention, the quantitative decision model of the repair scheme is a repair material decision model based on the entropy weight method and considering the comprehensive weight, such as Figure 2 After assigning evaluation indicators to various repair schemes based on the repair process and material evaluation standards, the evaluation indicator level matrix is ​​constructed. R `.

[0051] After standardizing the evaluation index level matrix, the level standard matrix is ​​generated R , the evaluation index assignment formula after standardization is as follows: ; Where: Assign values ​​to the evaluation indicators.

[0052] In the horizontal standard matrix R On this basis, the entropy value and entropy weight of the indicators are calculated, and the subjective weight of the experts is fully considered. The entropy weight method is modified to obtain the comprehensive weight coefficient formula as follows: ; Where: is the subjective weight of each indicator expert, ; w j is the entropy weight of each evaluation index.

[0053] The formula for calculating the comprehensive attribute degree of the repair solution by the decision model of the present invention is as follows: ; Where: is the comprehensive weight of each evaluation index; Assign values ​​to the evaluation indicators after standardization.

[0054] The evaluation index assignment and comprehensive weight coefficient of the crack defect repair solution in the case after standardized processing are shown in the following table.

[0055] Table 6 Evaluation index assignment after standardization

[0056] Table 7 Comprehensive weight coefficient

[0057] Step 5: Input defect feature information, make a decision on the necessity and urgency of repair, sort the defect repair plans, and output the defect repair plans.

[0058] As the preferred technical solution of the present invention, the decision on the necessity and urgency of repair takes into account factors such as defect level, environment, appearance requirements, impact on safety, etc., and determines the necessity and urgency decision-making principle, including three categories: necessary repair but not urgent, necessary repair and urgent, and no repair.

[0059] The present invention sorts according to the size of the comprehensive attribute degree. The larger the comprehensive attribute value is, the more reasonable the repair solution is.

[0060] By quantitatively assigning values ​​to indicators such as the repair effect, mechanical properties, environmental protection, economy, and convenience of the crack defect repair scheme, and introducing the subjective weights of experts, the comprehensive attribute degrees of each scheme are shown in Table 8 below.

[0061] Table 8 Comprehensive attribute degree of each scheme

[0062] As can be seen from the table, the epoxy grouting material repair scheme is the best. The results show that the method of the present invention can make decisions on the repair scheme according to the scheme characteristics and the expert supervisor weights, and output the optimal repair scheme.

[0063] The above description is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the present invention. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions and improvements made within the spirit and principles of the present invention should be included in the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair schemes of hydraulic structures based on historical case data, characterized by: The following steps are involved: Step 1: Analyze and organize the historical repair case data of typical defects of hydraulic structures, build a structured hierarchy of "buildings, working conditions, defects, repair materials and processes", and perform structured processing on the case data to generate a structured database; Step 2: Construct a classification standard for typical defects and classify the typical defects; Step 3: Construct a repair solution evaluation standard and conduct quantitative evaluation of typical defect repair solutions; Step 4: Consider the characteristics and comprehensive weights of the repair plan, and build a quantitative decision model for defect repair plans based on the entropy weight method; Step 5: In actual applications, input defect feature information, make decisions on the necessity and urgency of defect repair, sort the defect repair solutions, and output the optimal defect repair solution.

2. The quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair schemes of hydraulic structures based on historical case data according to claim 1 is characterized in that: In the step 1, the structured hierarchy is a tree structure, and after the structured processing, a case data structured database is formed.

3. The quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair schemes of hydraulic structures based on historical case data according to claim 1 is characterized in that: In step 2, typical defects include breakage, erosion, cracks, and leakage. According to the characteristics of the defects and their impact on the safety of hydraulic structures, the typical defects are classified and graded taking into account the difficulty of repair, the level of repair work, the recurrence, the harm of not repairing, and the specificity of repair.

4. The quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair schemes of hydraulic structures based on historical case data according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The evaluation standard of the repair scheme in step 3 is a quantitative evaluation standard based on the NGT method, which takes into account the repair effect, convenience, mechanical properties of materials, environmental friendliness, and economic performance of materials of the repair scheme, and quantitatively assigns values ​​to the repair scheme.

5. The quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair schemes of hydraulic structures based on historical case data according to claim 4 is characterized in that: The range of variation of the grading of the quantitative index of the evaluation standard based on the NGT method is 0 to 10, which is divided into 4 levels, and the range of variation of each level is [0, 2.5].

6. The quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair schemes of hydraulic structures based on historical case data according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The quantitative decision model for the repair scheme in step 4 is a repair material decision model based on the entropy weight method and taking comprehensive weights into consideration, and the repair schemes are ranked according to the comprehensive attribute degrees.

7. The quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair schemes of hydraulic structures based on historical case data according to claim 6 is characterized in that: The comprehensive weight coefficient of the quantitative decision-making model of the repair solution is: （1）； Where: is the comprehensive weight coefficient; is the subjective weight of experts for each indicator; w j is the entropy weight of each evaluation index; The comprehensive attribute degree formula is: （2）； Where: is the comprehensive attribute degree; is the comprehensive weight of each evaluation index; Assign values ​​to the evaluation indicators after standardization.

8. The quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair schemes of hydraulic structures based on historical case data according to claim 1 is characterized by: The decision on the necessity and urgency of repair in step 5 takes into account the defect level, the environment, appearance requirements and factors affecting safety, and determines the principle of the necessity and urgency decision.

9. The quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair schemes of hydraulic structures based on historical case data according to claim 8 is characterized by: The repair decision principles include three categories: necessary repair but not urgent, necessary repair and urgent, and no repair.

10. The quantitative decision-making method for typical defect repair schemes of hydraulic structures based on historical case data according to claim 1 is characterized by: In step 5, after the defect feature information is input, the repair solution quantitative decision model calculates the comprehensive attribute degree of each repair solution and sorts them, and outputs the optimal repair solution.

Images