Existing house structure safe and rapid physical examination method based on check and calculation fusion examination

Abstract

The invention relates to an existing house structure safe and rapid physical examination method based on check-calculation fusion examination. The method comprises the following steps: acquiring house construction age, structural form and historical reconstruction information; calculating an age index according to the construction age and the transformation specialty; determining a professional index based on the integrity of the design drawing and the construction normalization; evaluating the rationality of the structural system, and determining structural system indexes; measuring the overall deformation of the house and censoring the damage condition of the components, and quickly estimating the bearing capacity of the high-risk components to obtain the overall current situation classification of the structure; determining a structure condition index according to the overall current situation classification of the structure, evaluating a field inspection condition, and determining an inspection condition index; calculating a building structure potential safety hazard evaluation index; according to the numerical range of the evaluation index, grading the safety level of the house; and when the evaluation index is in a grading threshold critical interval, manual intervention adjustment is started, and grading is carried out again. According to the invention, the omission hidden risk and cost are reduced, and the efficiency is improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of house inspection, and in particular to a method for rapid safety inspection of existing house structures based on calculation and fusion inspection. Background Art

[0002] Traditional building structure safety hazard inspections mainly rely on two types of technical means: manual experience inspection mode and full detection and identification mode.

[0003] The manual experience inspection mode is based on the qualitative inspection method of the "Dangerous Building Identification Standard". It judges damage through visual observation and simple measurement. Although it is highly efficient, it cannot identify components that appear intact but have insufficient bearing capacity, and there is a risk of missing hidden components.

[0004] The full inspection and identification mode uses professional instruments to inspect all components and establishes a structural model to verify the bearing capacity. Although the results are reliable, the economic cost is high and the timeliness is poor, which cannot meet the requirements of periodic rapid screening. Summary of the Invention

[0005] Based on this, it is necessary to provide a rapid safety inspection method for existing building structures based on integrated inspection and calculation to address the technical problems of traditional building structure safety hazards, such as omissions and hidden risks, high economic costs and poor timeliness.

[0006] The present invention provides a method for rapid safety inspection of existing building structures based on calculation and fusion inspection, comprising:

[0007] Obtain information on the building's construction year, structural form, and renovation history through data review and on-site investigation;

[0008] The age index T is calculated based on the construction year and renovation professionalism;

[0009] Determine the professionalism index M based on the completeness of the design drawings and the standardization of construction;

[0010] Evaluate the rationality of the structural system and determine the structural system index C1;

[0011] Measure the overall deformation of the building and survey the damage status of components, quickly estimate the bearing capacity of high-risk components, and obtain the overall structural status classification;

[0012] Determine the structural condition index C2 based on the overall structural status grading, and evaluate the on-site inspection conditions to determine the inspection condition index C3;

[0013] The building structure safety hazard evaluation index I is calculated based on the formula I = T × M × C1 × C2 × C3;

[0014] Classify the housing safety level according to the numerical range of the evaluation index I and determine the safety level classification threshold;

[0015] When I is in the critical interval of the classification threshold, manual intervention adjustment and re-classification are initiated.

[0016] In one embodiment, the calculation of the age index T based on the construction age and the renovation expertise includes:

[0017] If the house has not been reinforced and renovated, the grade is divided according to the standard system corresponding to the original construction period, and the T value is 0.85-1.0;

[0018] If the house has been professionally reinforced and renovated, T is determined according to the standard system corresponding to the renovation period;

[0019] If the transformation is a non-professional local change, T will still be determined according to the original construction year.

[0020] In one embodiment, the measurement of the overall deformation of the building and the survey of the damage status of the components, the rapid estimation of the bearing capacity of high-risk components, and the acquisition of the overall structural status classification include:

[0021] S51. Measure the average inclination of the building's corner ridges to determine the current deformation level. This indicator is divided into three levels: 1, 2, and 3. Deformation thresholds are set for low-rise, multi-story, and high-rise buildings.

[0022] S52. Inspect all upper structural components of the building, evaluate the safety status of each component in sequence according to S53 to S510, and determine the status grade of each component;

[0023] S53. Investigate the damage of components and rate them according to their damage status. The damage level is divided into 3 levels: 1, 2, and 3. The damage thresholds between each level are based on the damage standard.

[0024] S54: If the component damage level in S53 is directly rated as level 3, this level will be directly used as the current status level of the component, and subsequent evaluation will be carried out according to S510 without further bearing capacity estimation;

[0025] S55: If the component damage level in S53 is rated as level 1 or 2, determine whether to perform bearing capacity estimation according to S56 and S57;

[0026] S56: If the component is a ground floor transverse wall of a masonry structure house, measure the wall including its thickness, relevant bay dimensions, and storey height, and conduct a detailed investigation including the number of upper floors and service loads. Supplement the component bearing capacity estimate in accordance with S58 to determine the component bearing capacity grade.

[0027] S57: If the component is a square concrete column in the upper part of the structure and the cross-sectional width is less than 300mm, then the information including the column cross-section, column spacing, and storey height shall be measured, and the information including the number of upper floors and service load shall be investigated in detail. The bearing capacity of the component shall be supplemented in accordance with S59 to determine the bearing capacity grade of the component;

[0028] S58, Masonry wall bearing capacity estimation: Estimate the service load and its effect S according to the measured information including bay, storey height, and number of floors, and estimate the resistance R of the structural components based on the empirical material mechanical properties, and use the empirical bearing capacity index I bc The bearing capacity of components is graded by numerical values ​​and is divided into three levels: 1, 2, and 3.

[0029] S59, Concrete column estimation: Estimate the service load and its effect S according to the measured information including column spacing, storey height, and number of floors, and estimate the structural component resistance R based on the empirical material mechanical properties, and use the empirical bearing capacity index I bc The bearing capacity of components is graded numerically into three levels: 1, 2, and 3;

[0030] S510: Combine the component damage grade evaluated in S53 and the bearing capacity grade evaluated in S58 and S59 to form the component's current status rating, which is divided into three levels: 1, 2, and 3. If there are multiple results, the most unfavorable level is taken as the component's current status rating evaluation result;

[0031] S511, counting the component grading results of S510, and determining the current status grade of the structural components according to the number of structural components of different grades, which is divided into three grades: 1, 2, and 3;

[0032] S512. Based on the grading results of S51 and S511, determine the overall status grading of the structure, which is divided into three levels: 1, 2, and 3. The most unfavorable level between the S51 deformation status grading and the S511 structural component status grading is taken as the evaluation result.

[0033] In one embodiment, for masonry components in existing multi-story residential buildings, the bearing capacity index I bc The formula is:

[0034]

[0035] Where γ0 is the structural importance coefficient, S represents the effect of the component, and R represents the bearing capacity of the component.

[0036] In one embodiment, for a concrete column in an existing multi-story frame structure that is mainly subjected to compression, the bearing capacity index I bc The formula is:

[0037]

[0038] Where, ξ N is the column axial compression ratio, ξ s is the contribution coefficient of reinforcement, and η is the reduction coefficient of the long column bearing capacity.

[0039] In one embodiment, the method further comprises:

[0040] According to the actual load situation of the component, the ratio of live load to dead load ρ is calculated. When the resistance variation coefficient δ of this type of component is known, R On this basis, the resistance-load effect combination variation coefficient δ is calculated using the formula:

[0041]

[0042] According to the obtained resistance-load effect combination variation coefficient δ, according to the target reliability index Target reliability index with a design service life of 50 years The difference between the two is used to calculate the limit threshold of the bearing capacity index [I bc ], the formula is:

[0043]

[0044] In one embodiment, the classifying of housing safety levels according to the numerical range of the evaluation index I includes:

[0045] When I is greater than or equal to 0.8, it is rated as Class I;

[0046] When I is between 0.5 and 0.8, it is rated as Class II;

[0047] When I is less than 0.5, it is rated as Class III.

[0048] In one embodiment, when I is in a critical range of the classification threshold, initiating manual intervention adjustment and re-classification includes:

[0049] When the difference between I and the classification threshold is ≤0.05, I can be corrected within the range of ±0.05 and the classification judgment is re-executed.

[0050] In one embodiment, the professional index M has a value of 0.85 to 1.0, and the integrity of the design drawings and the standardization of construction include the integrity of the design drawings and the standardization of signatures, the completeness of the material inspection report in the construction records, and whether the renovation and reinforcement plan is implemented by a qualified unit.

[0051] In one embodiment, the structural system index C1 takes a value of 0.7 to 1.0 and is evaluated by the following indicators: continuity of vertical components and rationality of force transmission paths of horizontal components, regularity of structural plane layout and compliance of construction measures at key nodes.

[0052] This embodiment of the rapid structural safety inspection method for existing buildings, based on integrated inspection and calculation, dynamically adjusts the evaluation benchmark using the construction age index T and the professionalism index M to adapt to the differences in construction codes across historical periods and address the problem of "compliance misjudgment" in older buildings caused by code iterations. Targeted inspection of high-risk components allows for rapid estimation of the bearing capacity of vulnerable components such as ground-floor masonry walls and small-section concrete columns, improving the detection rate of hidden defects and enabling more accurate identification of hidden risks. Furthermore, by measuring the overall deformation of the building and surveying the integrity of components, unnecessary inspection items are reduced, avoiding the use of excessive specialized equipment and the need for detailed bearing capacity modeling, analysis, and verification. Compared to professional inspection and appraisal, this method significantly improves work efficiency and reduces costs. The multiplication formula of the evaluation index I enables the nonlinear superposition of multidimensional risk factors, improving the accuracy of identifying complex safety hazards. Furthermore, a manual correction mechanism for graded thresholds is introduced, allowing for manual intervention and adjustment in critical areas of the algorithm, preventing single-model misjudgments of edge cases and enhancing the engineering applicability of the final conclusions. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0053] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the present invention or the prior art, a brief introduction will be given below to the drawings required for use in the embodiments or the description of the prior art. Obviously, the drawings described below are some embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without paying any creative work.

[0054] Figure 1 This is a flow chart of a method for rapid safety inspection of existing building structures based on query and calculation fusion inspection according to one embodiment of the present invention;

[0055] Figure 2 A flow chart of a physical examination and evaluation according to one embodiment of the invention;

[0056] Figure 3 This is a flow chart of a method for rapid safety inspection of existing building structures based on calculation and fusion inspection according to another embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0057] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention more clear, the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without making creative efforts shall fall within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0058] It should be noted that when a component is referred to as being "fixed to" or "disposed on" another component, it may be directly on the other component or there may be a central component. When a component is considered to be "connected to" another component, it may be directly connected to the other component or there may be a central component at the same time. The terms "vertical", "horizontal", "upper", "lower", "left", "right" and similar expressions used in the specification of the present invention are for illustrative purposes only and do not represent the only implementation method.

[0059] Furthermore, the terms "first" and "second" are used for descriptive purposes only and should not be construed as indicating or implying relative importance or implicitly specifying the number of the technical features being referred to. Thus, a feature defined as "first" or "second" may explicitly or implicitly include at least one such feature. In the description of the present invention, "plurality" means at least two, such as two, three, etc., unless otherwise specifically defined.

[0060] In the present invention, unless otherwise expressly specified or limited, when a first feature is "above" or "below" a second feature, it can mean that the first feature is directly in contact with the second feature, or the first feature and the second feature are in contact indirectly through an intermediary. Furthermore, when a first feature is "above," "above," or "above" a second feature, it can mean that the first feature is directly above or diagonally above the second feature, or simply means that the first feature is higher in level than the second feature. When a first feature is "below," "below," or "below" a second feature, it can mean that the first feature is directly below or diagonally below the second feature, or simply means that the first feature is lower in level than the second feature.

[0061] Unless otherwise defined, all technical and scientific terms used in the present description have the same meanings as those commonly understood by those skilled in the art to which this invention pertains. The terms used in this description are for the purpose of describing specific embodiments only and are not intended to limit the present invention. The term "and / or" as used in this description includes any and all combinations of one or more of the associated listed items.

[0062] Traditional building structure safety hazard inspections mainly rely on two types of technical means: manual experience inspection mode and full detection and identification mode.

[0063] The manual experience inspection model is based on the qualitative inspection method of the "Dangerous Building Identification Standard". It judges damage through visual observation and simple measurement. Although it is highly efficient, it cannot identify components that appear intact but have insufficient bearing capacity (such as ground floor masonry walls and small-section concrete columns), which poses a risk of missing hidden risks. In addition, the inspection conclusions rely on personnel experience and lack a quantitative evaluation basis. They are highly subjective and can easily lead to misjudgments.

[0064] The full inspection and appraisal mode uses professional instruments (rebound hammer, rebar scanner, etc.) to inspect all components and establish a structural model to verify the bearing capacity. Although the results are reliable, the inspection cost of a single multi-story residential building exceeds 10,000 yuan, which is difficult to cover the needs of large-scale housing inspections. The economic cost is high. In addition, on-site inspection and modeling analysis take more than 8 man-days, which cannot meet the requirements of periodic rapid screening and has poor timeliness.

[0065] In the existing technology, patent CN119130220 proposes a hybrid assessment method of "on-site inspection + quantitative testing", but the following problems still exist:

[0066] Limitations in detection objects: only quantitative detection is conducted on houses with serious apparent problems, and a risk-oriented targeted detection mechanism has not been established, resulting in a waste of resources; the evaluation model is rigid: a fixed threshold is used to determine the safety level, and dynamic factors such as the construction year and renovation expertise are not considered, resulting in a high misjudgment rate for old houses; lack of human-computer collaboration: the algorithm output result is directly used as the final judgment conclusion, and no manual correction interface is set up, making it difficult to cope with complex boundary conditions.

[0067] Therefore, there is an urgent need for a rapid assessment method for building structure safety that takes into account both efficiency and accuracy.

[0068] The following combination Figure 1-Figure 3 The present invention describes a method for rapid safety inspection of existing building structures based on calculation and fusion inspection.

[0069] like Figure 1 and Figure 2 As shown, in one embodiment, a method for rapid safety inspection of existing building structures based on calculation and fusion inspection includes the following steps:

[0070] Step S10: Obtain information on the building's construction year, structural form, and renovation history through data review and on-site investigation.

[0071] Check and collect existing basic information such as the house's design drawings, and combine it with a preliminary on-site visit and survey to investigate basic information such as the house's construction year, construction method, usage function, renovation history, structural form, and ownership relationship.

[0072] Step S20: Calculate the age index T based on the construction age and renovation expertise.

[0073] Based on the data survey and preliminary investigation results in Section S1, the age index T is determined by combining the construction and renovation years. The construction age does not refer to a specific year, but is divided into several construction age levels based on the design standard system used at the time of construction. For example, the age index can be divided into four levels based on 1990 (89 standard system), 2001 (01 standard system), and 2021 (current standard system), with the age index values ​​of 0.85, 0.9, 0.95, and 1.0 respectively.

[0074] Step S30: Determine the professionalism index M based on the completeness of the design drawings and the standardization of the construction.

[0075] Based on the preliminary findings of step S10 and the completeness and validity of the drawings and materials, the professionalism of the building construction is assessed, and the professionalism index M is further determined. This index should be determined based on the professionalism of the design, construction, and reinforcement and renovation, and should range from 0.85 to 1.0, with intervals of 0.05. Alternatively, the value of the professionalism index M can be determined based on factors such as the completeness and standardization of the design drawings, the completeness of the material testing reports in the construction records, and whether the renovation and reinforcement plan was implemented by a qualified organization.

[0076] Step S40: Evaluate the rationality of the structural system and determine the structural system index C1.

[0077] Based on the preliminary findings from step S1, the rationality of the building's structural system is assessed and the structural system index C1 is determined. This index should be determined based on the rationality of the actual structural system, layout, and connection configuration. For example, it can range from 0.7 to 1.0, with an interval of 0.05. Alternatively, the structural system index C1 can be evaluated using the following indicators: the continuity of vertical components and the rationality of horizontal component force transmission paths, the regularity of the structural plan layout, and the compliance of key node construction measures.

[0078] Step S50: Measure the overall deformation of the building and survey the damage status of components, quickly estimate the bearing capacity of high-risk components, and obtain the overall status classification of the structure.

[0079] Conduct detailed measurements and investigations on the current status of the house, follow the "whole first, then components" investigation model, investigate and evaluate the overall deformation of the house, component damage, and component bearing capacity, and provide a classification of the overall status of the structure.

[0080] Step S60: Determine the structural condition index C2 based on the overall structural status, and evaluate the on-site inspection conditions to determine the inspection condition index C3.

[0081] According to the overall structural status grading results of S5, the structural condition index C2 is determined, for example, divided into 3 levels, where the value of level 1 is 0.9-0.95, the value of level 2 is 0.65-0.75, and the value of level 3 is 0.4-0.5.

[0082] Based on the working conditions of the on-site investigation, the on-site inspection condition index C3 is determined. This index is comprehensively determined based on the on-site conditions of the structural condition inspection (such as whether key parts can be entered, whether structural components are covered by external decorative layers, whether the actual condition of the structure can be inspected, etc.), for example, it takes a value between 0.85 and 1.0, with an interval of 0.05.

[0083] Step S70 , calculating the building structure safety hazard evaluation index I based on the formula I=T×M×C1×C2×C3.

[0084] Step S80: classify the safety level of the house according to the numerical range of the evaluation index I and determine the safety level classification threshold.

[0085] According to the building structure safety hazard evaluation index I in step S70, the preliminary judgment conclusion of the building safety hazard is graded. For example, when I is greater than or equal to 0.8, it is rated as Class I (pass), which means that no safety hazard has been found yet, and there is no need for safety appraisal, and normal use and maintenance can be carried out; when I is between 0.5 and 0.8, it is rated as Class II (basically passed), which means that there are certain safety hazards, and a safety appraisal should be carried out, and the handling will be based on the appraisal results; when I is less than 0.5, it is rated as Class III (failed), which means that there are serious safety hazards and a safety appraisal or hazard appraisal must be carried out immediately to identify the danger points and eliminate the danger immediately.

[0086] Step S90: When I is in the critical range of the classification threshold, manual intervention adjustment is initiated and re-classification is performed.

[0087] Determine whether the evaluation index I of step S70 is near the grading threshold of step S80. When I is near the grading threshold (for example, the difference is within 0.05), the evaluation index I can be manually adjusted according to the actual situation, for example, not exceeding ±0.05, and the grading of step S80 can be performed again, and the final evaluation result can be output, and the house can be handled accordingly according to the physical examination evaluation result.

[0088] This embodiment of the rapid structural safety inspection method for existing buildings, based on integrated inspection and calculation, dynamically adjusts the evaluation benchmark using the construction age index T and the professionalism index M to adapt to differences in construction codes across historical periods. This addresses the problem of "compliance misjudgment" in older buildings caused by code iterations (for example, masonry structures from the 1980s may be directly judged unsafe according to current codes). Targeted inspection of high-risk components rapidly estimates the bearing capacity of vulnerable components such as ground-floor masonry walls and small-section concrete columns, improving the detection rate of hidden defects and enabling more accurate identification of hidden risks. Furthermore, by measuring the overall deformation of the building and then inspecting the integrity of components, the method employs a "first overall deformation measurement, then component integrity inspection" approach, reducing unnecessary inspection items and reducing the time required for a single building inspection from 8 man-days in traditional inspection and appraisal to 2.5 man-days. This eliminates the need for excessive specialized equipment and detailed bearing capacity modeling, analysis, and verification, significantly improving work efficiency and reducing costs compared to professional inspection and appraisal. The multiplication formula of the evaluation index I enables the nonlinear superposition of multi-dimensional risk factors, improving the accuracy of identifying complex safety hazards. In addition, a manual correction mechanism for graded thresholds is introduced to allow manual intervention and adjustment in the critical areas determined by the algorithm, avoiding misjudgment of boundary cases by a single model and improving the engineering applicability of the final conclusion.

[0089] like Figure 3 In one embodiment, the age index T is calculated based on the construction age and renovation expertise, including the following steps:

[0090] Step S21: If the house has not been reinforced or renovated, the level is divided according to the standard system corresponding to the original construction year, and the value of T is 0.85-1.0. Based on the preliminary investigation results of step S10, it is determined whether the house has been reinforced or renovated.

[0091] S22. If no reinforcement or renovation is required under S21, the age index T shall be determined based on the construction year. If reinforcement or renovation is required, the professionalism of the reinforcement or renovation shall be further assessed based on the drawings and on-site investigation results.

[0092] In step S22, if the house has undergone professional reinforcement and renovation, the age index T is determined based on the corresponding standard system for the renovation period. If the reinforcement and renovation is judged to be highly professional, that is, the structure has been systematically reinforced according to the design standard system used at the time of renovation, the age index T should be determined based on the reinforcement and renovation period as the construction period.

[0093] In step S23, if the renovation is a non-professional, local modification, the original construction year is still used to determine T. If the reinforcement renovation is judged to be less professional, such as a local functional modification or non-standard reinforcement, the structural reliability of the house should be considered to be still basically at the original design level, and the age index T should be determined based on the original construction year.

[0094] exist Figure 1 and Figure 2 In the embodiment shown, measuring the overall deformation of the building and inspecting the damage status of components, quickly estimating the bearing capacity of high-risk components, and obtaining the overall structural status classification includes the following steps:

[0095] S51. Measure the average inclination of the building's corner ridges to determine the current deformation level. This indicator is divided into three levels: 1, 2, and 3. Deformation thresholds are set for low-rise, multi-story, and high-rise buildings within each level, as shown in Table 1.

[0096] Table 1 Classification standard of housing deformation status

[0097] Deformation status level Low-rise houses (1 to 2 floors) multi-story houses high-rise buildings Level 1 (best) ≤1％ ≤0.7％ ≤0.4％ Level 2 (Medium) 1％-3％ 0.7％-2％ 0.4％-1％ Level 3 (worst) >3％ >2％ >1％

[0098] S52. Survey all upper structural components of the house, evaluate the safety status of each component in sequence according to S53 to S510, and determine the status level of each component.

[0099] S53. Investigate component damage and rate components based on their damage status. Damage levels are divided into three levels: 1, 2, and 3. The damage thresholds between each level are based on damage standards, as shown in Table 2.

[0100] Table 2 Classification standard for damage of building structural components

[0101]

[0102] S54. If the component damage level in S53 is directly rated as level 3, this level will be directly used as the current status level of the component. Subsequent evaluation will be carried out in accordance with S510, and the bearing capacity estimation will no longer be performed.

[0103] S55. If the component damage level in S53 is rated as level 1 or 2, determine whether to perform bearing capacity estimation based on S56 and S57.

[0104] S56. If the component is a ground floor transverse wall of a masonry structure house, measure the wall's thickness, relevant bay dimensions, and storey height, and conduct a detailed investigation of the information including the number of upper floors and service load. Supplement the component's bearing capacity estimate in accordance with S58 to determine the component's bearing capacity grade.

[0105] S57. If the component is a square concrete column in the upper part of the structure and the cross-sectional width is less than 300mm, then the information including the column cross-section, column spacing, and storey height shall be measured, and the information including the number of upper floors and service load shall be investigated in detail. The bearing capacity estimate of the component shall be supplemented in accordance with S59 to determine the bearing capacity grade of the component.

[0106] S58, Masonry wall bearing capacity estimation: Estimate the service load and its effect S according to the measured information including bay, storey height, and number of floors, and estimate the resistance R of the structural components based on the empirical material mechanical properties, and use the empirical bearing capacity index I bc The bearing capacity of components is graded numerically into three levels: 1, 2, and 3. For masonry components in existing multi-story residential buildings, I bc The calculation method is as follows, and the classification method is based on the comprehensive coefficient of variation δ considering resistance and effect, and the difference Δβ of the reliability index T Calculate the limit threshold of the bearing capacity index [I bc ], further the bearing capacity index I bc The classification method of masonry components is shown in Table 3.

[0107]

[0108] Where γ0 is the structural importance factor, S represents the effect of the component, and R represents the bearing capacity of the component. When calculating S, the upper dead load and live load are combined according to the current design specifications and the effect is calculated. To simplify the calculation, in the case of conventional multi-story residential buildings, the force transmission calculation can be based on prefabricated one-way slabs, and the floor dead load is 4kN / m 2 , live load 2kN / m 2 , balcony live load 2.5kN / m 2 When calculating R, material properties should be estimated based on empirical material strength statistics for each region. For example, for residential buildings built in the 1980s, the brick strength grade is MU15, and the masonry mortar strength grade is M1.5. The calculated wall height is determined based on three-sided support conditions or current design specifications. Doorway widths are reduced based on current design specifications.

[0109] Table 3 Masonry wall bearing capacity estimation classification standard

[0110] Component bearing capacity grade <![CDATA[I bc ]]> Level 1 (best) <![CDATA[I bc ≥0.8]]> Level 2 (Medium) <![CDATA[0.7≤I bc <0.8]]> Level 3 (worst) <![CDATA[I bc <0.7]]>

[0111] S59, Concrete column estimation: Estimate the service load and its effect S according to the measured information including column spacing, storey height, and number of floors, and estimate the structural component resistance R based on the empirical material mechanical properties, and use the empirical bearing capacity index I bc The bearing capacity of components is graded numerically into three levels: 1, 2, and 3. For existing multi-story frame structures with compression-dominated concrete columns, I bc The calculation method can be further simplified as follows: the classification method is based on the comprehensive coefficient of variation δ considering resistance and effect, and the difference Δβ of the reliability index T Calculate the limit threshold of the bearing capacity index [I bc ], further the bearing capacity index I bcThe concrete column classification method is shown in Table 4.

[0112]

[0113] Where, ξ N is the column axial compression ratio, ξ s is the contribution coefficient of steel bar, η is the reduction coefficient of long column bearing capacity (related to the load eccentricity). When the eccentricity is small (small eccentric compression column), ξ s The influence of is very small and can be ignored. When calculating the axial compression ratio of a column, N should be calculated by combining the upper dead load and live load according to the current design specifications. The material strength f should be estimated based on the statistical value of empirical material strength in various regions.

[0114] Table 4 Classification standard for estimating bearing capacity of small-section concrete columns

[0115] Component bearing capacity grade <![CDATA[I bc ]]> Level 1 (best) <![CDATA[I bc ≥0.9]]> Level 2 (Medium) <![CDATA[0.8≤I bc <0.9]]> Level 3 (worst) <![CDATA[I bc <0.8]]>

[0116] S510. Combine the component damage grade evaluated by S53 and the bearing capacity grade evaluated by S58 and S59 as the current status rating of the component, which is divided into three grades: 1, 2, and 3. When there are multiple results, the most unfavorable grade is taken as the component current status grade evaluation result.

[0117] S511. Count the component grading results of S510 and determine the current status grade of the structural components according to the number of structural components of different grades, which are divided into three grades: 1, 2, and 3. The grading method is shown in Table 5.

[0118] Table 5 Structural component status classification standards

[0119]

[0120] S512. Based on the grading results of S51 and S511, determine the overall status grading of the structure, which is divided into three levels: 1, 2, and 3. The most unfavorable level between the S51 deformation status grading and the S511 structural component status grading is taken as the evaluation result.

[0121] In this embodiment, the method for rapid safety inspection of existing building structures based on query and calculation fusion inspection also includes:

[0122] According to the actual load situation of the component, the ratio of live load to dead load ρ is calculated. When the resistance variation coefficient δ of this type of component is known, R On this basis, the resistance-load effect combination variation coefficient δ is calculated using the following formula:

[0123]

[0124] According to the obtained resistance-load effect combination variation coefficient δ, according to the target reliability index Target reliability index with a design service life of 50 years The difference between the two is used to calculate the limit threshold of the bearing capacity index [I bc ], the calculation formula is as follows:

[0125]

[0126] For example, for masonry axial compression walls, based on the 10-year target reliability (approximately the design code level in the 1970s) and the 1-year target reliability (approximately the level of dangerous buildings), the calculated limit threshold [I bc ] are 0.78 and 0.66 respectively. It is conservative to take 0.7 and 0.8 as the limit thresholds of classification. Similarly, for the concrete small eccentric column, the limit thresholds [I bc ] are 0.86 and 0.78 respectively. A conservative approach can take 0.8 and 0.9 as the boundary thresholds for grading.

[0127] Since the rapid physical examination and evaluation of this plan is only a "rough evaluation + preliminary evaluation", for houses that are not professionally built or renovated and cannot be subject to the specific evaluation in the plan, they can be directly rated as Class II (basically passed) and then undergo "fine evaluation + final evaluation" through professional testing and appraisal. This approach is reasonable and economical.

[0128] The technical features of the above-mentioned embodiments can be combined arbitrarily. In order to make the description concise, not all possible combinations of the technical features in the above-mentioned embodiments are described. However, as long as there is no contradiction in the combination of these technical features, they should be considered to be within the scope of this specification.

[0129] The above-described embodiments merely illustrate several embodiments of the present invention, and while the descriptions are relatively specific and detailed, they should not be construed as limiting the scope of the present invention. It should be noted that a person skilled in the art would be able to make various modifications and improvements without departing from the spirit of the present invention, and these modifications and improvements fall within the scope of the present invention. Therefore, the scope of the present invention shall be determined by the appended claims.

Claims

1. A method for rapid safety inspection of existing building structures based on calculation and fusion inspection, characterized by: include: Obtain information on the building's construction year, structural form, and renovation history through data review and on-site investigation; The age index T is calculated based on the construction year and renovation professionalism; Determine the professionalism index M based on the completeness of the design drawings and the standardization of construction; Evaluate the rationality of the structural system and determine the structural system index C1; Measure the overall deformation of the building and survey the damage status of components, quickly estimate the bearing capacity of high-risk components, and obtain the overall structural status classification; Determine the structural condition index C2 based on the overall structural status grading, and evaluate the on-site inspection conditions to determine the inspection condition index C3; The building structure safety hazard evaluation index I is calculated based on the formula I = T × M × C1 × C2 × C3; Classify the housing safety level according to the numerical range of the evaluation index I and determine the safety level classification threshold; When I is in the critical interval of the classification threshold, manual intervention adjustment and re-classification are initiated.

2. The method for rapid safety inspection of existing building structures based on calculation and fusion inspection according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The age index T is calculated based on the construction age and renovation professionalism, including: If the house has not been reinforced and renovated, the grade is divided according to the standard system corresponding to the original construction period, and the T value is 0.85-1.0; If the house has been professionally reinforced and renovated, T is determined according to the standard system corresponding to the renovation period; If the transformation is a non-professional local change, T will still be determined according to the original construction year.

3. The method for rapid safety inspection of existing building structures based on calculation and fusion inspection according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The above-mentioned measurement of the overall deformation of the building and the survey of the damage status of the components, the rapid estimation of the bearing capacity of high-risk components, and the acquisition of the overall structural status classification include: S51. Measure the average inclination of the building's corner ridges to determine the current deformation level. This indicator is divided into three levels: 1, 2, and 3. Deformation thresholds are set for low-rise, multi-story, and high-rise buildings. S52. Inspect all upper structural components of the building, evaluate the safety status of each component in sequence according to S53 to S510, and determine the status grade of each component; S53. Investigate the damage of components and rate them according to their damage status. The damage level is divided into 3 levels: 1, 2, and 3. The damage thresholds between each level are based on the damage standard. S54: If the component damage level in S53 is directly rated as level 3, this level will be directly used as the current status level of the component, and subsequent evaluation will be carried out according to S510 without further bearing capacity estimation; S55: If the component damage level in S53 is rated as level 1 or 2, determine whether to perform bearing capacity estimation according to S56 and S57; S56: If the component is a ground floor transverse wall of a masonry structure house, measure the wall including its thickness, relevant bay dimensions, and storey height, and conduct a detailed investigation including the number of upper floors and service loads. Supplement the component bearing capacity estimate in accordance with S58 to determine the component bearing capacity grade. S57: If the component is a square concrete column in the upper part of the structure and the cross-sectional width is less than 300mm, then the information including the column cross-section, column spacing, and storey height shall be measured, and the information including the number of upper floors and service load shall be investigated in detail. The bearing capacity of the component shall be supplemented in accordance with S59 to determine the bearing capacity grade of the component; S58, Masonry wall bearing capacity estimation: Estimate the service load and its effect S according to the measured information including bay, storey height, and number of floors, and estimate the resistance R of the structural components based on the empirical material mechanical properties, and use the empirical bearing capacity index I bc The bearing capacity of components is graded by numerical values ​​and is divided into three levels: 1, 2, and 3. S59, Concrete column estimation: Estimate the service load and its effect S according to the measured information including column spacing, storey height, and number of floors, and estimate the structural component resistance R based on the empirical material mechanical properties, and use the empirical bearing capacity index I bc The bearing capacity of components is graded numerically into three levels: 1, 2, and 3; S510: Combine the component damage grade evaluated in S53 and the bearing capacity grade evaluated in S58 and S59 to form the component's current status rating, which is divided into three levels: 1, 2, and 3. If there are multiple results, the most unfavorable level is taken as the component's current status rating evaluation result; S511, counting the component grading results of S510, and determining the current status grade of the structural components according to the number of structural components of different grades, which is divided into three grades: 1, 2, and 3; S512. Based on the grading results of S51 and S511, determine the overall status grading of the structure, which is divided into three levels: 1, 2, and 3. The most unfavorable level between the S51 deformation status grading and the S511 structural component status grading is taken as the evaluation result.

4. The method for rapid safety inspection of existing building structures based on calculation and fusion inspection according to claim 3 is characterized in that: For masonry components in existing multi-story residential buildings, the bearing capacity index I bc The formula is: Where γ0 is the structural importance coefficient, S represents the effect of the component, and R represents the bearing capacity of the component.

5. The method for rapid safety inspection of existing building structures based on calculation and fusion inspection according to claim 3 is characterized in that: For existing multi-story frame structures with concrete columns that are mainly subjected to compression, the bearing capacity index I bc The formula is: Where, ξ N is the column axial compression ratio, ξ s is the contribution coefficient of reinforcement, and η is the reduction coefficient of the long column bearing capacity.

6. The method for rapid safety inspection of existing building structures based on calculation and fusion inspection according to claim 3 is characterized in that: The method further comprises: According to the actual load situation of the component, the ratio of live load to dead load ρ is calculated. When the resistance variation coefficient δ of this type of component is known, R On this basis, the resistance-load effect combination variation coefficient δ is calculated using the formula: According to the obtained resistance-load effect combination variation coefficient δ, according to the target reliability index Target reliability index with a design service life of 50 years The difference between the two is used to calculate the limit threshold of the bearing capacity index [I bc ], the formula is:

7. The method for rapid safety inspection of existing building structures based on calculation and fusion inspection according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The classification of housing safety levels according to the numerical range of the evaluation index I includes: When I is greater than or equal to 0.8, it is rated as Class I; When I is between 0.5 and 0.8, it is rated as Class II; When I is less than 0.5, it is rated as Class III.

8. The method for rapid safety inspection of existing building structures based on calculation and fusion inspection according to claim 1 is characterized in that: When I is within the critical interval of the classification threshold, manual intervention adjustment and re-classification are initiated, including: When the difference between I and the classification threshold is ≤0.05, I can be corrected within the range of ±0.05 and the classification judgment is re-executed.

9. The method for rapid safety inspection of existing building structures based on calculation and fusion inspection according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The professional index M ranges from 0.85 to 1.

0. The integrity of the design drawings and the standardization of construction include the integrity of the design drawings and the standardization of signatures and seals, the completeness of the material inspection reports in the construction records, and whether the renovation and reinforcement plan is implemented by a qualified unit.

10. The method for rapid safety inspection of existing building structures based on calculation and fusion inspection according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The structural system index C1 takes a value of 0.7 to 1.0 and is evaluated by the following indicators: the continuity of vertical components and the rationality of the force transmission path of horizontal components, the regularity of the structural plane layout and the compliance of the construction measures of key nodes.

Images