Method for determining optimal positioning height of power transmission tower

Abstract

The invention discloses a method for determining the optimal positioning height of a power transmission tower, and belongs to the field of power transmission line design, and the method comprises the following steps: S1, data determination; s2, constructing a comprehensive evaluation model; s3, obtaining a high positioning scheme score; and S4, screening an optimal positioning height scheme. By comprehensively considering various boundary constraint conditions and the weight of each constraint condition and by means of the quantitative evaluation model and the multi-objective optimization algorithm, the optimal positioning height of the power transmission tower can be accurately selected according to user requirements, the design efficiency and accuracy are effectively improved, meanwhile, the line construction cost is effectively reduced, and the method is suitable for popularization and application. The safety, reliability and environmental protection property of a power transmission line are improved, and a powerful guarantee is provided for safe and stable operation of a power grid.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention belongs to the technical field of transmission line design, and specifically relates to a method for determining the optimal positioning height of transmission towers. Background Technique

[0002] Transmission towers are important support structures for transmission lines, and the selection of their positioning height directly affects the economy, environmental protection, and safety of transmission lines. Especially in recent years, with the continuous expansion of the power grid scale and the continuous growth of power demand, the construction of transmission lines has increased day by day, putting forward higher requirements for the economy, environmental protection, and safety of transmission lines.

[0003] The traditional method for determining the positioning height of transmission towers mainly relies on the relative relationship between the tower body and legs of the tower and the terrain profile line, relying on manual repeated comparison and judgment, overly relying on manual experience, having problems such as low efficiency and poor accuracy, and also having problems such as inability to quantify influencing factors. In a certain project, due to the use of the traditional method to determine the positioning height of transmission towers, the exposed height of the foundations of some tower positions was too large, increasing the foundation consumption and raising the construction cost.

[0004] In the current power grid construction, facing complex geographical environments, meteorological combinations, and increasingly strict requirements for soil and water conservation and ecological protection, the traditional method for determining the positioning height of transmission towers gradually exposes limitations and is difficult to meet the current construction requirements. With the expansion of the power grid scale and the increasing improvement of environmental protection requirements, there is an urgent need for an intelligent method that can quantify influencing factors to determine the optimal positioning height of the tower. Summary of the Invention

[0005] The purpose of the present invention is to provide a method for determining the optimal positioning height of transmission towers, to solve the problems that the determination of the positioning height of traditional transmission towers is affected by experience and the influencing factors cannot be quantified, so that the determined positioning height can better meet the actual needs of the project and the expectations of users.

[0006] The technical solution adopted by the present invention is: a method for determining the optimal positioning height of transmission towers, including the following steps:

[0007] S1. Data determination: According to the initial positioning height, initial tower type, and positioning height allowable adjustment value required by the electrical specialty in the transmission line design, determine various combinations of tower bodies and legs that meet the requirements and the corresponding diagonal half root opening, tower weight, and foundation consumption data;

[0008] S2. Construct a comprehensive evaluation model: Use each combination of tower bodies and legs and the positioning height as variables, take the optimal comprehensive score within the whole life cycle as the objective function, and incorporate boundary parameters as constraint conditions;

[0009] S3. Obtain the scores of the positioning height solutions: According to the tower base cross-section diagram provided by the measurement, use the least squares fitting plane method and the multi-objective optimization algorithm, and combine the weight values of various factors set by the user to solve the comprehensive evaluation model and obtain the scores of a series of possible positioning height solutions.

[0010] S4. Screen the optimal positioning height solution: Sort the comprehensive scores of each positioning height solution, and screen out the optimal positioning height solution after comprehensively considering other factors according to the sorting results. If there is only one solution with the highest comprehensive score, then it is the optimal positioning height solution. If there is more than one solution with the highest comprehensive score, then other factors need to be comprehensively considered. Here, other factors can be economic factors, etc.

[0011] Further, in S1, when determining various combinations of body and leg connections that meet the requirements, correct the initial positioning height to obtain the corrected positioning height:

[0012] Dwg 初始 <<Dwg 修正 <<Dwg 初始 +δ

[0013] Wherein, Dwg 修正 -- Corrected positioning height, Dwg 初始 -- Initial positioning height required by the electrical specialty, abbreviated as the initial positioning height; δ-- Allowable adjustment value of the positioning height set by the user.

[0014] Further, the boundary constraint conditions include the exposed height of the foundation, the designed exposed height of the foundation, the allowable foundation lowering height, and the positioning height adjustment step;

[0015] The exposed height of the foundation is used to limit the range of the foundation exposed on the ground;

[0016] The designed exposed height of the foundation is used to limit the height difference between the top surface of the foundation and the exposed height control point on the ground;

[0017] The positioning height adjustment step is used to control the loop step in the positioning height optimization process;

[0018] The allowable foundation lowering height is used to limit the foundation lowering height of the uphill side tower leg on the slope terrain.

[0019] Further, in step 2, the comprehensive score calculation formula of the objective function is:

[0020] C = C1×ω1 + C2×ω2 + C3×ω3 + C4×ω4

[0021]

[0022] Wherein:

[0023] C1 is the positioning height score, x iThe height to be selected for positioning is high, a is the initial electrical positioning height, M is a preset maximum deviation value for normalizing the score, δ can be taken when high precision is required, and 3δ can be taken when low precision is required; ω1 is the weight ratio of the positioning height.

[0024] C2 is the score of the exposed height of the foundation, x 2i is the value of the exposed height of each leg foundation under the height to be selected for positioning; a2 and b2 are the lower and upper limits of the preset interval; k2 is a decay factor with a value range of 0 to 1, usually 0.5 or lower; s2 is an adjustment parameter used to control the score decline rate when exceeding the interval [a2, b2], which can be set according to the actual situation, and usually s2 = 0.2×(b2 - a2); ω2 is the weight ratio of the exposed height of the foundation.

[0025] C3 is the score of the designed exposed height of the foundation, x 3i is the value of the designed exposed height of each leg foundation under the height to be selected for positioning; a3 and b3 are the lower and upper limits of the preset interval; k3 is a decay factor with a value range of 0 to 1, usually 0.5 or lower; s3 is an adjustment parameter used to control the score decline rate when exceeding the interval [a3, b3], which can be set according to the actual situation, and usually s3 = 0.2×(b3 - a3); ω3 is the weight ratio of the designed exposed height of the foundation.

[0026] C4 is the score of the allowable foundation lowering height, x 4i is the allowable foundation lowering height of each leg under the height to be selected for positioning, g4 is the target value (usually 0), d4 is the maximum deviation allowed relative to the target value, that is, the maximum height of allowable foundation lowering; λ is when x 4i is a parameter that controls the C4 value decline rate when it is less than g4, generally 3 can be taken; ω4 is the weight ratio of the allowable foundation lowering height.

[0027] Furthermore, in the said step 3, the process of obtaining the comprehensive score of the positioning height scheme is as follows:

[0028] First, select the first combination among the various body - leg connection combinations determined in step 1, and draw a tower leg template with the same scale as the tower base section;

[0029] Then, according to the relative relationship between the tower leg template and the terrain lines of each leg in the tower base section, use the least - squares fitting method to obtain the height difference between each tower leg and the terrain line;

[0030] Then, within the set positioning height adjustment range, calculate the comprehensive score of the evaluation model that meets the boundary constraint conditions one by one at each step length for various positioning heights;

[0031] Finally, perform a loop calculation for the remaining combinations among the various body - leg connection combinations to obtain the comprehensive scores of each positioning height scheme among all combinations.

[0032] Further, in step 4, the steps for screening the optimal positioning height plan are as follows:

[0033] First, sort the comprehensive scores of each positioning height plan from high to low;

[0034] Next, list the scores of each sub-item under each plan and store the relative relationship between the tower leg template and each leg terrain line under each plan;

[0035] Then, the user intuitively views each alternative plan according to the comprehensive score ranking. If there are no special other control factors, the plan ranked first is default selected as the optimal positioning height plan.

[0036] Further, when there are two or more relatively optimal plans, introduce an economic comparison function:

[0037] Cost(x) = Cost1(x) + Cost2(x)

[0038] Wherein, Cost(x) is the comprehensive cost under a certain positioning height, Cost1(x) is the cost of the iron tower under a certain positioning height, and Cost2(x) is the cost of the foundation under a certain positioning height;

[0039] Calculate the comprehensive cost of each relatively optimal plan using the economic comparison function, and screen out the relatively optimal plan from the perspective of economy.

[0040] The present invention has the following beneficial effects: By comprehensively considering various constraint conditions and weights, and with the aid of a quantitative evaluation model and optimization algorithm, the present invention can accurately optimize and select the optimal positioning height of the transmission iron tower according to user requirements, effectively improving the design efficiency and accuracy. At the same time, it effectively reduces the line construction cost, improves the safety, reliability and environmental protection of the transmission line, and provides a strong guarantee for the safe and stable operation of the power grid. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0041] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention, the following will briefly introduce the drawings required for description in the embodiments. Obviously, the following drawings are only some embodiments of the present invention. For those of ordinary skill in the art, other drawings can be obtained according to these drawings without creative efforts.

[0042] Figure 1 It is a flowchart of the method for determining the optimal positioning height of the transmission iron tower of the present invention;

[0043] Figure 2 It is a schematic diagram of the tower base cross-section;

[0044] Figure 3 It is a schematic diagram of the optimal positioning height selection disclosed in Embodiment 1;

[0045] Figure 4 Schematic diagram of high-preferred positioning disclosed in Embodiment 2;

[0046] Figure 5 Schematic diagram of high-preferred positioning disclosed in Embodiment 3. Detailed implementation manners

[0047] The present invention will be further described below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and embodiments as follows:

[0048] The present invention will be further described below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments, so that those skilled in the art can better understand the present invention and be able to implement it. However, the examples given are not intended to limit the present invention. Without conflict, the embodiments of the present invention and the technical features in the embodiments can be combined with each other.

[0049] As Figure 1 shown in the flowchart, the method for determining the optimal positioning height of a transmission tower includes the following steps:

[0050] S1. Data determination: According to the initial positioning height, initial tower type, and positioning height allowable adjustment value required by the electrical specialty in the transmission line design, determine various combinations of body and leg connections that meet the requirements and the corresponding diagonal half base span, tower weight, and foundation consumption data.

[0051] For the convenience of subsequent programmed optimization, the data in each combination case obtained here can generally be stored in an array for easy calling and data management. For example: Enter all the tower data used in this project into the database according to items such as tower type, body, short leg, long leg, diagonal half base span, tower weight, and foundation consumption. At the same time, establish a retrieval item with the tower type-body-leg-maximum call height corresponding to the body as the keyword, and the corresponding diagonal half base span, tower weight, foundation consumption, etc. data are behind each retrieval item.

[0052] When screening and determining the combinations of body and leg connections that meet the requirements, in order to more comprehensively determine the combinations of body and leg connections, the initial positioning height preliminarily determined by electricity can be corrected according to the positioning height allowable adjustment value set by the user to obtain the corrected positioning height:

[0053] Dwg 初始 <<Dwg 修正 <<Dwg 初始 +δ

[0054] Wherein, Dwg 修正 -- Corrected positioning height, Dwg 初始 -- Initial positioning height required by the electrical specialty, referred to as the initial positioning height; δ -- Positioning height allowable adjustment value, which is set by the user. Since the initial positioning height preliminarily determined by electricity is a pre-arranged value, in order to appropriately correct the positioning height during optimization, the user can set δ to 1m according to the actual usage situation here.

[0055] According to the corrected positioning height, all body and leg combinations that meet the requirements are found. This process involves a large amount of screening work. To improve efficiency and avoid missing combination items, it can be completed by a program using the data in the database.

[0056] S2. Build a comprehensive evaluation model: Take each body and leg combination and the positioning height as variables, with the optimal comprehensive score within the whole life cycle as the objective function, and incorporate boundary parameters as constraint conditions at the same time.

[0057] The above-mentioned boundary constraint conditions include the basic exposed height, the basic designed exposed height, the positioning height adjustment step, and the allowable foundation lowering height. Among them, the basic exposed height is used to limit the range of the foundation exposed on the ground; the basic designed exposed height is used to limit the height difference between the top surface of the foundation and the exposed height control point on the ground; the positioning height adjustment step is used to control the loop step in the process of optimizing the positioning height; the allowable foundation lowering height is used to limit the foundation lowering height of the tower leg on the uphill side of the slope terrain.

[0058] The objective function comprehensively considers the safety, economy, environmental protection requirements of the transmission line, and the construction difficulty, etc.

[0059] The range values of the parameters within the constraint conditions are differentially set by the user according to the actual application scenario and the relevant external environment, as follows:

[0060] The positioning height adjustment step is used to control the loop step of the positioning height in the optimization process. The smaller the set value, the more times of loop optimization, and the higher the accuracy. Since the accuracy requirement for the positioning height of the transmission line project is not too high, this value is generally set to 0.2m to improve the optimization efficiency while taking into account the accuracy requirement.

[0061] The basic exposed height is used to limit the range of the foundation exposed on the ground under each positioning height and body and leg combination. The higher the exposure, the greater the construction difficulty. Generally, the minimum is taken as 0.2m to ensure that the foundation exposed on the ground does not accumulate water, and the maximum is taken as 2.0m to control the construction difficulty during the foundation pouring. Of course, for the tower positions with flooding, it is also necessary to meet the requirement that the top surface of the foundation is higher than the flooding elevation according to the hydrological data submission.

[0062] The basic designed exposed height is used to limit the height difference between the top surface of the foundation and the exposed height control point on the ground under each positioning height and body and leg combination. The greater the exposed height, the greater the foundation consumption, and at the same time, the greater the earthwork volume. In addition, when the exposed height is too large, it also poses a certain risk to the safety of the iron tower and the foundation. The user sets this value according to the actual situation and the foundation plan. Generally, the minimum is taken as 0.5m, and the maximum is taken as 6.0m.

[0063] The allowable base lowering height is mainly used to limit the allowable base lowering height of the uphill tower leg when located on a slope terrain. Although currently, in response to the requirements of environmental protection for water and soil, base lowering is generally not allowed during construction, for some locally irregular terrains, such as the case where boulders exist near the tower leg, the treatment method of removing boulders can be considered. This parameter is set by the user according to specific circumstances and generally takes 0m.

[0064] The above constraints are defined from multiple dimensions such as safety, economy, requirements of environmental protection for water and soil, and construction difficulty, ensuring that the constructed comprehensive evaluation model can more comprehensively evaluate various combinations of tower body and tower leg connections and positioning heights.

[0065] S3. Obtain the scores of positioning height schemes: According to the tower base cross-section diagram provided by the measurement, using the least squares fitting plane method and multi-objective optimization algorithm, combined with the weight values of each constraint set by the user, solve the comprehensive evaluation model to obtain the scores of a series of possible positioning height schemes. The formula for the comprehensive score is as follows:

[0066] C = C1×ω1 + C2×ω2 + C3×ω3 + C4×ω4

[0067]

[0068] Where:

[0069] C1 is the score of the positioning height, x i is the positioning height to be selected, a is the initial electrical positioning height, M is a preset maximum deviation value for normalizing the score, which can take δ when high precision is required and 3δ when low precision is required; ω1 is the weight ratio of the positioning height.

[0070] C2 is the score of the foundation exposed height, used to evaluate the score of the foundation exposed height item. The higher the score, the smaller the deviation degree of the foundation exposed height of each leg from the predetermined interval. At the same time, this value can also indirectly evaluate the construction difficulty of the foundation. The higher the score, the smaller the deviation from the predetermined interval and the relatively smaller the construction difficulty, and vice versa, the greater the construction difficulty. x 2i is the value of the foundation exposed height of each leg under the positioning height to be selected; a2 and b2 are the lower and upper limits of the preset interval; k2 is a decay factor, with a value of 0 << k2 << 1, usually 0.5 or lower; s2 is an adjustment parameter used to control the score decline rate when exceeding the interval [a2, b2], which can be set according to actual circumstances. Usually, s2 = 0.2×(b2 - a2); ω2 is the weight ratio of the foundation exposed height. If the user emphasizes that the foundation exposed height value must be strictly within the preset interval, the ω2 weight value can be adjusted larger and other weight values can be adjusted smaller.

[0071] C3 is the foundation design exposed height score, which is used to evaluate the quality of the foundation design exposed height value and avoid the situation where the design exposed height is too large in the optimization result. The higher the C3 score, the smaller the deviation between the foundation design exposed height of each leg and the predetermined range, and the smaller the foundation design exposed height value. 3i is the design exposed height value of each leg foundation of the selected location height; a3 and b3 are the lower and upper limits of the preset range; k3 is an attenuation factor, 0< <k3<<1,通常为0.5或更低;s3是调整参数,用于控制超出区间[a3,b3]时得分的下降速度,可根据实际情况设置,通常情况下s3=0.2×(b3-a3);ω3为基础设计露高的权重占比,用户如偏重于避免出现基础设计露高较大的优选结果,可将ω3权重值调大,其他权重值调小。

[0072] C4 is the score for the allowable base reduction height, which is used to determine whether the preferred positioning height solution can be appropriately reduced. The higher the score, the smaller the deviation between the allowable base reduction height of each leg and the preset target value within the preset maximum offset. At the same time, this value can also be used to evaluate environmental and water conservation requirements for mountain slope terrain. When the preset target value is set to 0, the occurrence of base reduction in the preferred solution can be effectively controlled. 4i is the allowable base drop height of each leg below the selected positioning height, g4 is the target value (usually 0), d4 is the maximum allowable deviation from the target value, that is, the maximum allowable base drop height; λ is when x 4i The parameter that controls the rate of decrease of C4 value when it is less than g4 can generally be taken as 3; ω4 is the weight ratio of the allowable base height reduction. If the usage scenario has high requirements for environmental and water conservation, the weight value can be increased and other weight values ​​can be reduced.

[0073] The specific process of this step is as follows:

[0074] First, select the first combination of the various body and leg combinations determined in step 1, and draw a tower leg template with the same proportion as the tower base section according to the data prepared in advance (the drawing process can be completed by programming to improve efficiency);

[0075] Then, according to the relative relationship between the tower leg template and the topographic line of each leg in the tower foundation section, the height difference between each tower leg and the topographic line is obtained by using the least squares method to fit the plane;

[0076] Then, within the set optimal range of positioning height, the comprehensive scores of the evaluation models that meet the boundary constraints under various positioning height conditions are calculated one by one according to the step length;

[0077] Finally, the remaining combinations in each body-and-leg connection are calculated cyclically to obtain the comprehensive score of each high-positioning scheme in all combinations.

[0078] S4. Screen the optimal high-positioning plan: Sort the comprehensive scores of each high-positioning plan, and screen out the optimal high-positioning plan after comprehensively considering other factors according to the sorting results. The specific operation steps are as follows:

[0079] First, sort the comprehensive scores of each high-positioning plan from high to low;

[0080] Next, list the scores of each sub-item under each plan, and store the relative relationship between the tower leg template and each leg terrain line under each plan;

[0081] Then, the user intuitively views each alternative plan according to the comprehensive score sorting. If there are no other special control factors (such as insufficient tower height), the plan ranked first is default selected as the optimal high-positioning plan.

[0082] Example 1:

[0083] Step 1. Collect relevant preparation data according to the initial tower type and high-positioning:

[0084] For the convenience of data management and realizing programmatic optimization, all the tower data used in a project are entered into the database according to item catalogs such as tower type, body connection, short legs, long legs, diagonal half root opening, tower weight, and foundation consumption. At the same time, a retrieval item is established with the maximum height of the tower type-body connection-leg connection-body connection as the keyword, and the corresponding diagonal half root opening, tower weight, foundation consumption, etc. data are behind each retrieval item.

[0085] Step 2. Screen out various combinations of body connection and leg connection that meet the requirements according to the optimized high-positioning range after correction. In this step, the allowable adjustment value of the high-positioning is set to 1.0m, that is, the allowable adjustment range of the high-positioning during optimization is Dwg 初始 ~Dwg 初始 +1.

[0086] Step 3. Build a comprehensive evaluation model, and set the objective function and constraint conditions. In this step, the boundary ranges of the constraint conditions are set as follows: the high-positioning adjustment step size is taken as 0.2m; the allowable adjustment value of the high-positioning is 1.0m; the preset interval of the foundation exposed height is taken as 0.2m~2.0m; the preset interval of the foundation design exposed height is taken as 0.5m~6.0m; the allowable foundation lowering height is taken as 2.0m.

[0087] Step 4. Solve the comprehensive evaluation model, calculate the comprehensive scores of each high-positioning plan, and the comprehensive score calculation formula is as follows:

[0088] C = C1×ω1 + C2×ω2 + C3×ω3 + C4×ω4

[0089] Among them, ω1 takes a value of 25%, and the preset maximum deviation value M is taken as δ. For example, M takes 1 in this example.

[0090] The value of ω2 is 25%, the interval [a2, b2] is taken as [0.2, 2.0], the attenuation factor k2 is taken as 0.5, and the adjustment parameter s2 is taken as 0.36.

[0091] The value of ω3 is 25%, the interval [a3, b3] is taken as [0.5, 6.0], the attenuation factor k3 is taken as 0.5, and the adjustment parameter s3 is taken as 1.1.

[0092] The value of ω4 is 25%, the target value g4 is taken as 0, and the maximum deviation d4 is taken as 2.0.

[0093] Step 5: Determine the optimal positioning height scheme according to the score ranking:

[0094] Sort the comprehensive scores calculated in Step 4 from high to low, list the scores of each sub-item under each scheme, and store the configuration results of the relative relationship between the tower leg templates and the terrain lines under each scheme in each alternative scheme. The user can intuitively view the configuration effects of each alternative scheme according to the comprehensive score ranking, and by default, select the scheme ranked first as the final optimal scheme.

[0095] The target optimal scheme of this embodiment is that within the preset interval, the designed value of the foundation exposure height and the foundation exposed height value are as small as possible, the actual foundation lowering height of each leg is 0, and at the same time, it is closest to the initial positioning height of the electrical equipment.

[0096] The optimal positioning height scheme obtained in Embodiment 1 is as Figure 3 shown, and the result meets the expected optimal target scheme.

[0097] Embodiment 2:

[0098] The same steps as in Embodiment 1 are adopted, except for the value of the lower limit of the preset interval of the foundation exposed height. In Embodiment 2, there is a hydrological flooding situation in the area where the tower is located. As Figure 4 shown, the flooding elevation is 1.4 m higher than the elevation of the center pile of the tower. To ensure that the tower legs are not affected by the flooding water level, the top surface of the foundation column needs to be raised. At this time, the elevation of the top surface of the foundation of each leg cannot be less than the flooding elevation, that is, the value of the lower limit of the preset interval of the foundation exposed height cannot be less than 1.4 m. In such a case, a2 and a3 are set to 1.4. The optimal positioning height scheme obtained in this embodiment is as Figure 4 shown.

[0099] Embodiment 3:

[0100] In Embodiment 3, the terrain slope is relatively steep (the slope is greater than 35°).

[0101] The same steps as in Embodiment 1 are adopted, except that the value of the positioning height allowable adjustment in Embodiment 1 is 1.0 m; the value of the positioning height allowable adjustment in this embodiment is 6.0 m. In this embodiment, since the set value of the positioning height allowable adjustment is relatively large, the preferred range is expanded. One possible relatively optimal solution is that after slightly increasing the positioning height, due to the relatively steep slope of the tower position, the exposed height value of the tower leg foundation design on the downhill side is relatively large. At this time, the cost of the iron tower decreases and the cost of the foundation increases; another possible relatively optimal solution is to increase the positioning height by a large margin (such as changing to the next higher body section), making better use of the tower grade difference and reducing the exposed height of the foundation design. At this time, the cost of the iron tower increases and the cost of the foundation decreases. In the face of such a situation where there are two or more possible relatively optimal solutions, the solution of the present invention is to introduce an economic comparison function, and the calculation formula is as follows:

[0102] Cost(x) = Cost1(x) + Cost2(x)

[0103] Among them, Cost(x) is the total cost of the iron tower foundation at a certain positioning height; Cost1(x) is the cost of the iron tower at a certain positioning height; Cost2(x) is the cost of the foundation at a certain positioning height.

[0104] The above formula is a comparison of solutions when there are two or more relatively optimal solutions from an economic perspective, further expanding the applicable range and accuracy of the method. Of course, in this case, the user needs to use the iron tower weight under each body section and leg combination and the foundation consumption under various foundation design exposed heights in the preliminary data preparation to compare the economy of each solution during optimization. Finally, considering the cost comparison on the basis of the original comprehensive score ranking, the user determines the optimal solution according to the comprehensive score and economic comparison.

[0105] After comparing the economy of the two possible relatively optimal solutions, the second preferred solution with a lower comprehensive cost (increasing the positioning height by a large margin and reducing the exposed height of the foundation design) is selected as the optimal positioning height solution, that is, as Figure 5 shown in the figure.

[0106] Engineering practice shows that the optimal positioning heights of the transmission iron towers obtained in Embodiment 1, Embodiment 2, and Embodiment 3 all meet the engineering actual requirements and user expectations.

[0107] Although the present invention has been described herein with reference to the embodiments of the present invention, the above embodiments are only general embodiments of the present invention, and the embodiments of the present invention are not limited by the above embodiments. It should be understood that any modifications, equivalent replacements, improvements, etc. made within the spirit and principles of the present invention should be included within the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for determining the optimal positioning height of a transmission tower, characterized in that: The following steps are involved: S1. Data determination: According to the initial positioning height, initial tower type and positioning height allowable adjustment value required by the electrical professional in the transmission line design, determine the various body and leg connection combinations that meet the requirements and the corresponding diagonal half-root opening, tower weight, and foundation consumption data; S2. Construct a comprehensive evaluation model: take the combination of each body and leg joint and the positioning height as variables, take the optimal comprehensive score within the whole life cycle as the objective function, and include boundary parameters as constraints; S3. Obtaining the scores of the high positioning solutions: Based on the tower foundation cross-section provided by the measurement, the least squares method of fitting the plane and the multi-objective optimization algorithm are used, combined with the weight values ​​of each factor set by the user, to solve the comprehensive evaluation model and obtain the comprehensive scores of a series of possible high positioning solutions; S4. Screening the best high-positioning solution: sort the comprehensive scores of each high-positioning solution and screen out the best high-positioning solution.

2. The method for determining the optimal positioning height of a transmission tower according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step 1, when various body-joint and leg-joint combinations that meet the requirements are determined, the initial positioning height is corrected to obtain the corrected positioning height: Dwg 初始 <<Dwg 修正 <<Dwg 初始 +δ Among them, Dwg 修正 --Fix positioning height, Dwg 初始 --The initial positioning height required by electrical professionals, referred to as initial positioning height; δ--the allowable adjustment value of the positioning height set by the user.

3. The method for determining the optimal positioning height of a transmission tower according to claim 2, characterized in that: The boundary constraints include foundation exposed height, foundation design exposed height, allowable foundation reduction height and positioning height adjustment step length; The exposed height of the foundation is used to limit the range of the foundation exposed above the ground; The foundation design elevation is used to define the height difference from the foundation top surface to the ground elevation control point; The positioning height adjustment step length is used to control the cycle step length in the positioning height optimization process; The allowable base lowering height is used to limit the base lowering height of the tower legs on the uphill side of the slope terrain.

4. The method for determining the optimal positioning height of a transmission tower according to claim 3, characterized in that: In step 2, the comprehensive score calculation formula of the objective function is: C=C1×ω1+C2×ω2+C3×ω3+C4×ω4 in: C1 is the high score for positioning, x i is the selected positioning height, a is the electrical initial positioning height, M is a preset maximum deviation value used for normalizing the score; ω1 is the weight ratio of the positioning height; C2 is the basic exposed height score, x 2i is the exposed height value of the foundation of each leg of the selected positioning height; a2 and b2 are the lower and upper limits of the preset interval; k2 is the attenuation factor, which ranges from 0 to 1; s2 is an adjustment parameter used to control the speed of score decrease when the interval [a2, b2] is exceeded; ω2 is the weight ratio of the exposed height of the foundation; C3 is designed based on high score, x 3i is the design exposure height of the foundation of each leg of the selected positioning height, a3 and b3 are the lower and upper limits of the preset interval; k3 is an attenuation factor, with a value of 0 to 1; s3 is an adjustment parameter used to control the speed of score decrease when the interval [a3, b3] is exceeded; ω3 is the weight ratio of the basic design exposure height; C4 is the score for the allowable base height reduction, x 4i is the allowable base lowering height of each leg under the selected positioning height, g4 is the target value, d4 is the maximum allowable deviation from the target value, that is, the maximum allowable base lowering height; λ is the maximum allowable base lowering height when x 4i The parameter that controls the rate of decrease of C4 value when it is less than g4; ω4 is the weight ratio of the allowed base height decrease.

5. The method for determining the optimal positioning height of a transmission tower according to any one of claims 1 to 4, characterized in that: In step 3, the process of obtaining the comprehensive score of each high-positioning solution is as follows: First, select the first combination of the body and leg connections determined in step 1, and draw a tower leg template with the same proportion as the tower base section based on the data prepared in advance; Then, according to the relative relationship between the tower leg template and the topographic line of each leg in the tower foundation section, the height difference between each tower leg and the topographic line is obtained by using the least squares method to fit the plane; Then, within the set positioning height adjustment range, the comprehensive scores of the evaluation models that meet the boundary constraints under various positioning height conditions are calculated one by one according to the step length; Finally, the remaining combinations in each body-and-leg connection are calculated cyclically to obtain the comprehensive score of each high-positioning scheme in all combinations.

6. The method for determining the optimal positioning height of a transmission tower according to any one of claims 1 to 4, characterized in that: In step 4, the steps for selecting the optimal positioning solution are as follows: First, sort the comprehensive scores of each high-positioning solution from high to low; Next, the scores of each sub-item under each scheme are listed, and the relative relationship between the tower leg template and the terrain line of each leg under each scheme is stored; Then, the user can intuitively view the alternative plans according to the comprehensive score ranking. In the absence of other control factors, the plan ranked first is selected by default as the plan with the best positioning.

7. The method for determining the optimal positioning height of a transmission tower according to any one of claims 1 to 4, characterized in that: When there are two or more optimal solutions, an economic comparison function is introduced: Cost(x)=Cost1(x)+Cost2(x) Among them, Cost(x) is the comprehensive cost of a certain positioning height, Cost1(x) is the cost of a certain positioning height tower, and Cost2(x) is the cost of a certain positioning height foundation; The economic comparison function is used to calculate the comprehensive cost of each better solution, and the relatively optimal solution is selected from an economic perspective.

Images