Multi-source fusion-based rod type foundation automatic generation method

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of data processing, in particular to a multi-source fusion-based rod type foundation automatic generation method, which comprises the following steps of: acquiring multi-dimensional parameters; judging a line; environment evaluation; performing scheme matching; calculating parameters; checking wind resistance and inclination resistance; and checking the cost specification. According to the method, intelligent collaborative design of the pole type and the foundation of the power transmission line is realized through multi-source data fusion, a dynamic generation mechanism jointly driven by spatial geometric characteristics, geomechanical characteristics and environmental load parameters is constructed, and a geometric constraint relationship is established on a parameter level; a bearing matching and stability response relation is established between the terrain gradient and the geological bearing capacity, and quantitative coupling adjustment is formed through superposition calculation of wind speed and icing thickness parameters. The problems that the design efficiency is low, the precision is limited and the safety, the economical efficiency and the construction feasibility are difficult to take into account due to dependence on manual input, static rules and lack of a verification mechanism are effectively solved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of data processing technology, and in particular to an automatic generation method for pole-shaped foundations based on multi-source fusion. Background Technology

[0002] As the scale of power transmission line construction in my country continues to expand, high-voltage lines need to cross complex terrain and diverse geological conditions, while also facing the impact of environmental factors such as extreme wind speeds and icing. Traditional manual design and experience-based judgment are inefficient and have limited accuracy in pole type selection and foundation design, making it difficult to simultaneously consider safety, economy, and construction feasibility. Therefore, how to achieve intelligent and precise design of power transmission line pole types and foundation structures has become an urgent challenge to be solved.

[0003] Chinese Patent Application Publication No. CN120217580A discloses a batch design platform for transmission line tower foundations. The platform includes: a parameter input module, a data output module, a filtering module, a generation module, and a data storage module. The parameter input module receives various variable parameters of the transmission line foundation input by the user. The data output module receives the various variable parameters of the transmission line foundation sent by the parameter input module and determines multiple sets of foundation output parameters corresponding to the transmission line foundation based on these parameters. The filtering module filters out the optimal foundation output parameters from the multiple sets of output parameters based on preset design conditions. The generation module generates the design results of the transmission line foundation based on the optimal foundation output parameters. The data storage module stores the design results in a foundation library.

[0004] Therefore, the aforementioned batch design platform for transmission line tower foundations has the following problems: The platform mainly relies on users manually inputting various variable parameters, lacking real-time perception and automatic updates of environmental factors and geological conditions, which easily leads to incomplete matching between the design scheme and actual site conditions; when selecting the optimal foundation output parameters, the platform only relies on preset design conditions and static rules, lacking multi-source data fusion and parameter correlation analysis, and cannot fully consider the synergistic effects between pole type, foundation structure, and environmental complexity; the design results generated by the platform only provide basic library storage, lacking automatic verification, adjustment, and anomaly handling mechanisms, and cannot guarantee comprehensive compliance with wind load resistance, overturning resistance, cost, and standards. Summary of the Invention

[0005] To address this, the present invention provides an automatic generation method for pole-type foundations based on multi-source fusion. This method overcomes the problems of low design efficiency, limited accuracy, and difficulty in balancing safety, economy, and construction feasibility in the prior art due to reliance on manual input, static rules, and lack of verification mechanisms by real-time acquisition of multiple parameters of the transmission line and fusion analysis of characteristic parameter correlation equations.

[0006] To achieve the above objectives, this invention provides an automatic generation method for pole-type foundations based on multi-source fusion, comprising: Real-time acquisition of spatial coordinates, turning angles, span distances, terrain slopes, geological bearing capacity, ambient wind speeds, and ice thickness at each pole position of the transmission line; The line type is determined based on the spatial coordinates, the turning angle, and the span distance of any three adjacent pole positions; The environmental complexity level is determined based on the terrain slope and the geological bearing capacity. Based on the line type and the environmental complexity level, a matching algorithm combining rules and weights is used to select preliminary pole type schemes and foundation structure schemes from a preset typical design library. Based on the characteristic parameter correlation equation, the pole height parameter, foundation depth parameter, and pile length parameter are calculated according to the terrain slope, the geological bearing capacity, the environmental wind speed, and the ice thickness. A preliminary design scheme is generated based on the calculation results, the preliminary pole type scheme, and the foundation structure scheme. The preliminary design scheme is subjected to wind load resistance and overturning resistance verification in sequence. If the verification fails, the pole height parameter, the foundation burial depth parameter, and the pile length parameter are automatically adjusted, and the verification is re-executed until it passes. The preliminary design scheme that passes the verification is subjected to cost compliance verification and industry standard compliance verification. If the verification fails, a manual intervention warning is generated and the abnormal case is recorded to the preset typical design library. If the verification passes, the preliminary design scheme is output as the final design scheme.

[0007] Furthermore, the process of determining the line type based on the spatial coordinates of any three adjacent pole positions, the turning angle, and the span distance includes: Based on the spatial coordinates of the current pole position and the two adjacent pole positions before and after it, a total of three consecutive pole positions, the curvature of the line at the current pole position is calculated using a geometric method. When the curvature of the line is less than a preset first curvature threshold, the turning angle is less than a preset first angle threshold, and the span distance is less than a preset span distance threshold, the line type of the path formed by the three pole positions is determined to be a straight segment. When the line curvature is greater than or equal to the preset first curvature threshold and less than the preset second curvature threshold, the turning angle is greater than or equal to the preset first angle threshold and less than the preset second angle threshold, and the span distance is less than the preset span distance threshold, the line type is determined to be a turning segment. When the span distance is greater than or equal to the preset span distance threshold, the line type is determined to be a crossing section; When the curvature of the line is greater than or equal to a preset second curvature threshold and the turning angle is greater than or equal to a preset second angle threshold, the line type is determined to be a special turning segment.

[0008] Furthermore, the process of determining the environmental complexity level based on the terrain slope and the geological carrying capacity includes: The terrain complexity score is determined based on the terrain slope, wherein a first score is assigned when the terrain slope is less than a preset first slope threshold, a second score is assigned when the terrain slope is between the preset first slope threshold and a preset second slope threshold, and a third score is assigned when the terrain slope is greater than the preset second slope threshold. A geological complexity score is determined based on the geological bearing capacity, wherein a first score is assigned when the geological bearing capacity is greater than a preset first bearing capacity threshold, a second score is assigned when the geological bearing capacity is between the preset first bearing capacity threshold and a preset second bearing capacity threshold, and a third score is assigned when the geological bearing capacity is less than the preset second bearing capacity threshold. Calculate the weighted sum of the terrain complexity score and the geological complexity score, wherein the weight corresponding to the terrain complexity score is a preset terrain weight, and the weight corresponding to the geological complexity score is a preset geological weight; When the weighted sum is less than a preset first complexity threshold, the environment complexity level is determined to be simple. When the weighted sum is greater than or equal to a preset first complexity threshold and less than a preset second complexity threshold, the environmental complexity level is determined to be medium. When the weighted sum is greater than or equal to a preset second complexity threshold, the environmental complexity level is determined to be a complexity level.

[0009] Furthermore, the process of selecting preliminary pole type schemes and foundation structure schemes from a preset typical design library using a matching algorithm combining rules and weights, based on the line type and the environmental complexity level, includes: The corresponding pole type is determined according to the line type, where straight sections correspond to straight pole types, corner sections correspond to tension pole types, crossing sections correspond to crossing pole types, and special corner sections correspond to special pole types. Based on the environmental complexity level, the foundation structure type is determined according to the terrain slope and the geological bearing capacity; The pole type and the foundation structure type are combined to obtain the preliminary pole type scheme and the foundation structure scheme.

[0010] Furthermore, the process of determining the foundation structure type based on the environmental complexity level, the terrain slope, and the geological bearing capacity includes: A comprehensive judgment score is calculated based on the terrain slope and the geological bearing capacity according to a preset weight ratio. When the comprehensive judgment score is less than the preset first judgment threshold and the environmental complexity level is the simple level, an extended foundation is selected from the preset typical design library as the basic structure type. When the comprehensive judgment score is greater than or equal to the preset first judgment threshold and less than or equal to the preset second judgment threshold, or when the environmental complexity level is the medium level, pile foundation is selected as the foundation structure type from the preset typical design library; When the comprehensive judgment score is greater than the preset second judgment threshold, or when the environmental complexity level is the complexity level, a composite foundation is selected from the preset typical design library as the basic structure type.

[0011] Furthermore, based on the characteristic parameter correlation equation, the process of calculating the pole height parameter, foundation depth parameter, and pile length parameter according to the terrain slope, the geological bearing capacity, the environmental wind speed, and the ice thickness includes: The pole height parameter is determined by a preset wind load calculation formula based on the ambient wind speed, the ice thickness, and the preset load safety factor. The preset wind load calculation formula includes a wind speed correction factor and an ice load correction term. Based on the geological bearing capacity, soil layer distribution data, and preset foundation safety factor, the foundation depth parameter is determined by the preset foundation bearing capacity calculation formula, wherein the preset foundation bearing capacity calculation formula includes a geological condition correction coefficient and a soil layer distribution influence factor. Based on the terrain slope, the geological bearing capacity, and the preset slope stability coefficient, the pile length parameter is determined by the preset slope stability calculation formula, wherein the preset slope stability calculation formula includes a slope influence factor and a foundation bearing capacity correction term. Establish parameter association constraints to ensure that the pole height parameter, the foundation burial depth parameter, and the pile length parameter satisfy the preset collaborative working constraint equation.

[0012] Furthermore, the process of sequentially performing wind load resistance verification and overturning resistance verification on the preliminary design scheme includes: Verify whether the strength of the pole material in the preliminary design is greater than or equal to a preset material strength threshold; Calculate the overturning moment ratio of the preliminary design scheme under the preset extreme wind load condition, and verify whether it is greater than or equal to the preset overturning safety factor. Calculate the maximum stress of the pole structure in the preliminary design scheme under the combined conditions of the ambient wind speed and the ice thickness, and verify whether it is less than the preset stress utilization threshold of the allowable stress of the material. If any check fails, the check is deemed to have failed.

[0013] Furthermore, the process of automatically adjusting the pole height parameter, the foundation depth parameter, and the pile length parameter when the verification fails includes: Establish a priority order for parameter adjustments, wherein the foundation depth parameter has the highest priority, followed by the pile length parameter, and the pole height parameter has the lowest priority. When the overturning moment ratio verification fails, the foundation burial depth parameter is increased by adjusting the step size according to the preset burial depth. When the maximum stress test of the pole body fails, the pile length parameter is increased by adjusting the step size according to the preset pile length. When the material strength test fails, the rod height parameter is reduced by adjusting the preset rod height step size. After each parameter adjustment, the relevant parameters are recalculated and verified until the verification is passed or the preset maximum number of adjustments is reached.

[0014] Furthermore, the process of verifying the cost compliance and industry standard compliance of the preliminary design scheme that has passed the verification includes: The sum of the material cost and construction cost of a single pole in the preliminary design scheme is calculated to obtain the total cost estimate. The total cost estimate is then compared with the preset typical design cost benchmark to calculate the cost overrun rate. When the verification cost excess rate is less than or equal to the preset cost excess rate threshold, the preset industry standard database is called to verify whether the pole height parameter, the foundation burial depth parameter, and the pile length parameter meet the preset design standard requirements. Verify whether the structural forms of the poles and foundations in the preliminary design scheme meet the preset construction requirements; When both cost compliance verification and industry standard compliance verification are passed, the preliminary design scheme is confirmed to have passed verification. If any verification fails, the preliminary design scheme is deemed to have failed the compliance verification.

[0015] Furthermore, the process of generating a manual intervention warning and recording abnormal cases to the preset typical design library when the verification fails includes: When the preliminary design scheme fails the compliance verification, a manual intervention warning is generated, which includes the parameters of the current preliminary design scheme, the reason for the verification failure, and recommended handling measures. Record the complete design data of the current pole position, including the original input parameters, the design schemes of each adjustment, and the verification results of each time, forming anomaly cases; The abnormal cases are added to the abnormal case library of the preset typical design library, and case feature tags are marked.

[0016] Compared with existing technologies, the advantages of this invention lie in achieving intelligent collaborative design of transmission line pole types and foundations through multi-source data fusion, and constructing a dynamic generation mechanism driven by spatial geometric features, geomechanical properties, and environmental load parameters. This method establishes geometric constraints between spatial coordinates, rotation angles, and span distances at the parameter level to determine the line alignment and stress characteristics; it establishes a load-bearing matching and stability response relationship between terrain slope and geological bearing capacity to quantify environmental complexity; and it achieves quantitative coupling adjustment of tower height, foundation depth, and pile length through superimposed calculations of wind speed and icing thickness parameters, enabling the structural design to adaptively adjust to changes in external loads. The system achieves accurate matching of typical design schemes through an algorithm that combines rules and weights. It further combines multi-dimensional verification such as wind load resistance, overturning resistance, and economy to build a closed-loop optimization chain from data input, calculation derivation, parameter feedback to design output. This effectively improves the scientificity, reliability, and engineering adaptability of pole type and foundation design, and effectively solves the problems of low design efficiency, limited accuracy, and difficulty in balancing safety, economy, and construction feasibility caused by reliance on manual input, static rules, and lack of verification mechanisms.

[0017] Furthermore, through comprehensive analysis based on the spatial coordinates of three adjacent pole positions, turning angles, and span distances, a quantitative judgment mechanism between line geometry and structural classification was established. The curvature value is calculated using three-point spatial coordinates to accurately express the degree of local bending of the line, thus reflecting the impact of line alignment changes on pole stress and layout. The introduction of turning angles allows the system to distinguish the degree of stress concentration under different turning characteristics. The span distance parameter reflects the impact of conductor span changes on pole tension and foundation stability. By applying threshold partitioning to the three parameters of curvature, angle, and span distance, the system can automatically identify straight sections, turning sections, crossing sections, and special turning sections of the line, achieving an adaptive correspondence between line morphology and structural function. This process organically combines spatial geometric relationships with mechanical characteristics, providing clear geometric constraints for subsequent pole and foundation selection, thereby improving the accuracy and rationality of the overall line design.

[0018] Furthermore, by jointly analyzing topographic slope and geological bearing capacity, the environmental complexity level is determined, achieving a comprehensive assessment of the environmental conditions of the tower foundation from both geometric characteristics and mechanical properties. Topographic slope reflects the impact of surface undulation on foundation stability, while geological bearing capacity reflects the foundation's ability to withstand loads. In engineering, the two show a negative correlation: the steeper the slope, the lower the bearing capacity, and the more complex the environmental construction and structural stress conditions. By setting grading thresholds and performing weighted calculations, the contribution of topographic and geological factors can be dynamically balanced under different scenarios, thus scientifically distinguishing between simple, moderate, and complex environmental levels. This judgment mechanism allows the system to automatically identify potentially high-risk areas during the design phase, improving the accuracy and safety of the matching between the tower type and the foundation structure, avoiding misjudgments caused by deviations in a single parameter, and providing a reliable basis for subsequent tower type optimization and structural safety verification.

[0019] Furthermore, by combining spatial characteristics such as line curvature, turning angle, and span with environmental complexity levels, the most suitable pole type and foundation type are automatically selected according to the functional compatibility between pole type and foundation structure. This ensures that poles in straight sections, turning sections, crossing sections, and special turning sections can withstand corresponding mechanical loads under different terrain slopes and geological bearing capacity conditions, while maintaining the stability and economy of the overall structure, thus achieving a high degree of matching and optimized combination between pole type and foundation structure.

[0020] Furthermore, by calculating a comprehensive judgment score based on the terrain slope and geological bearing capacity according to preset weights, and combining it with the environmental complexity level, the most suitable foundation structure type is automatically selected. This enables extended foundations, pile foundations, and composite foundations to provide corresponding bearing capacity and stability for different slopes, bearing capacities, and complex environmental conditions, thereby ensuring balanced stress on the poles and stable and reliable foundations. At the same time, it takes into account construction economy and safety margin, achieving efficient matching between foundation structure type and site environment.

[0021] Furthermore, by comprehensively considering various factors such as terrain slope, geological bearing capacity, environmental wind speed, and ice thickness, the pole height, foundation depth, and pile length are calculated in a coordinated manner. This ensures that the pole height can withstand environmental wind loads and ice loads, the foundation depth meets the requirements of soil bearing capacity and safety factor, and the pile length takes into account both slope stability and foundation bearing capacity. This achieves a reasonable match and dynamic balance among various parameters, thereby ensuring that the transmission line towers are both stable and economical under different environmental conditions, and improving the overall structural reliability and disaster resistance.

[0022] Furthermore, by sequentially performing wind load resistance and overturning resistance checks, it is ensured that the strength of the pole material, the overturning moment ratio, and the stress of the pole structure under the combined action of wind load and icing all meet safety requirements. The parameters are interrelated: material strength determines the pole's ability to resist stress, the overturning moment ratio reflects the matching relationship between the foundation and the pole height, and the maximum stress, along with the ambient wind speed and icing thickness, determines the stress state of the pole. This achieves the overall stability and safety of the tower under complex meteorological conditions, improving the reliability and feasibility of the design scheme.

[0023] Furthermore, by establishing a priority adjustment mechanism for parameters such as pole height, foundation depth, and pile length, automatic optimization of the preliminary design scheme is achieved when requirements for overturning moment, pole stress, and material strength are not met. Prioritizing foundation depth adjustment effectively improves pole foundation stability, pile length adjustment enhances slope and soil bearing capacity, and pole height adjustment controls the stress distribution on the pole. Each parameter modification is followed by recalculation and verification to ensure consistency in stress and geometric conditions, thereby guaranteeing reliable structural safety and construction feasibility of the tower under complex environments and extreme loads.

[0024] Furthermore, by verifying the cost compliance and industry standard compliance of the preliminary design scheme, a balance between economy and safety was achieved in the design parameters. The total cost estimate combines the material cost of a single pole with the construction cost, ensuring that the pole height, foundation depth, and pile length parameters meet the structural bearing capacity and anti-overturning requirements while avoiding excessive costs. At the same time, by verifying each parameter and the pole foundation structure through the industry standard database, it is ensured that the selected pole type and foundation type can reasonably distribute the load, maintain overall stability and safety, and achieve a coordinated match between material usage, construction cost, and structural dimensions, thereby ensuring that the design is both economical and reasonable and meets construction and safety standards.

[0025] Furthermore, by automatically generating manual intervention warnings when the preliminary design fails compliance verification, and recording complete anomaly cases, including original input parameters, results of previous parameter adjustments, and verification feedback, in a pre-set typical design library, a systematic management of abnormal design situations is achieved. By recording and tagging pole position design data, verification results, and recommended handling measures, references can be provided for subsequent designs, optimizing the richness and coverage of the typical design library. Simultaneously, a dynamic correlation is established between pole type, foundation parameters, and environmental conditions, making anomaly handling and subsequent design adjustments more precise and efficient. Attached Figure Description

[0026] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of the automatic generation method for pole-type foundations based on multi-source fusion in this embodiment; Figure 2 This is a flowchart illustrating the selection of the preliminary pole type scheme and foundation structure scheme for this embodiment; Figure 3 This is a flowchart illustrating the wind load resistance and overturning resistance verification processes performed in this embodiment. Figure 4 As shown, it is a flowchart of the automatic adjustment in this embodiment. Detailed Implementation

[0027] To make the objectives and advantages of the present invention clearer, the present invention will be further described below with reference to embodiments; it should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are merely for explaining the present invention and are not intended to limit the present invention.

[0028] Preferred embodiments of the present invention will now be described with reference to the accompanying drawings. Those skilled in the art should understand that these embodiments are merely illustrative of the technical principles of the present invention and are not intended to limit the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0029] Please see Figure 1 The diagram shown is a flowchart of the automatic generation method for pole-type foundations based on multi-source fusion in this embodiment. This embodiment provides an automatic generation method for pole-type foundations based on multi-source fusion, including: Real-time acquisition of spatial coordinates, turning angles, span distances, terrain slopes, geological bearing capacity, ambient wind speeds, and ice thickness at each pole position of the transmission line; The line type is determined based on the spatial coordinates, the turning angle, and the span distance of any three adjacent pole positions; The environmental complexity level is determined based on the terrain slope and the geological bearing capacity. Based on the line type and the environmental complexity level, a matching algorithm combining rules and weights is used to select preliminary pole type schemes and foundation structure schemes from a preset typical design library. Based on the characteristic parameter correlation equation, the pole height parameter, foundation depth parameter, and pile length parameter are calculated according to the terrain slope, the geological bearing capacity, the environmental wind speed, and the ice thickness. A preliminary design scheme is generated based on the calculation results, the preliminary pole type scheme, and the foundation structure scheme. The preliminary design scheme is subjected to wind load resistance and overturning resistance verification in sequence. If the verification fails, the pole height parameter, the foundation burial depth parameter, and the pile length parameter are automatically adjusted, and the verification is re-executed until it passes. The preliminary design scheme that passes the verification is subjected to cost compliance verification and industry standard compliance verification. If the verification fails, a manual intervention warning is generated and the abnormal case is recorded to the preset typical design library. If the verification passes, the preliminary design scheme is output as the final design scheme.

[0030] In this embodiment, a pre-set typical design library is used to store standardized design templates for pole types and foundations, along with their applicable conditions. This library serves as the knowledge support unit for the system's automatic matching and calculation. It consists of three core data types: a pole type design dataset containing standard pole type parameters for transmission lines of different voltage levels (e.g., 110kV, 220kV, 500kV), including pole height, root opening, top diameter, material type, structural form (single circuit, double circuit, tension, straight, etc.), allowable rotation angle range, and typical stress characteristics; a foundation structure dataset; and a foundation structure dataset. It is used to store the structural parameters and applicable geological ranges of various typical foundation types (such as spread foundations, pile foundations, rock anchor foundations, and cylindrical foundations), including geological bearing capacity thresholds, burial depth ranges, pile length coefficients, and foundation size ratios; and an applicable condition index table to establish the correspondence between pole types and foundations, and to record the applicable environmental conditions for each scheme, such as terrain slope ranges, geological types (clay, sand, gravelly soil, bedrock, etc.), design wind speed ranges, and icing thickness ranges.

[0031] In this embodiment, the transmission line refers to an overhead high-voltage line system used to transmit electrical energy. It consists of several towers, conductors, and foundation structures laid out sequentially to realize the transmission of electrical energy between different areas. Spatial coordinates are used to determine the precise location of each tower in geographic space, which can be obtained through satellite mapping or UAV aerial surveying; the turning angle is used to describe the change in the turning direction of the line at the tower position, which is usually calculated from the spatial coordinates between the tower positions; the span distance represents the horizontal projected distance between two adjacent tower positions, which can be automatically generated from topographic survey data; the terrain slope is used to reflect the degree of ground undulation, which can be calculated based on a digital elevation model (DEM); the geological bearing capacity is used to characterize the bearing capacity of the foundation soil layer, which is obtained through on-site drilling sampling and retrieval from geological exploration databases; the environmental wind speed is the maximum wind speed value of the line area during the design reference period, which can be calculated from a meteorological monitoring system or historical meteorological data; the icing thickness represents the icing thickness value of the conductor or tower under extreme climatic conditions, which is derived from a meteorological simulation model or long-term monitoring data. By acquiring and anchoring the above multi-source parameters in real time, complete environmental and structural input characteristics of each pole position can be formed, providing a data foundation for the subsequent automated generation of pole types and foundations.

[0032] Intelligent collaborative design of transmission line pole types and foundations is achieved through multi-source data fusion, constructing a dynamic generation mechanism driven by spatial geometric features, geomechanical properties, and environmental load parameters. This method establishes geometric constraints between spatial coordinates, rotation angles, and span distances at the parameter level to determine the line alignment and stress characteristics; it establishes a load-bearing matching and stability response relationship between terrain slope and geological bearing capacity to quantify environmental complexity; and it forms a quantitative coupling adjustment of tower height, foundation depth, and pile length through the superposition calculation of wind speed and icing thickness parameters, enabling the structural design to adaptively adjust to changes in external loads. The system achieves precise matching of typical design schemes through a rule-based and weighted algorithm, further combining multi-dimensional verification of wind load resistance, overturning resistance, and economy, constructing a closed-loop optimization chain from data input, calculation derivation, parameter feedback to design output. This effectively improves the scientific nature, reliability, and engineering adaptability of pole type and foundation design, effectively solving the problems of low design efficiency, limited accuracy, and difficulty in balancing safety, economy, and construction feasibility caused by reliance on manual input, static rules, and lack of verification mechanisms.

[0033] Specifically, the process of determining the line type based on the spatial coordinates of any three adjacent pole positions, the turning angle, and the span distance includes: Based on the spatial coordinates of the current pole position and the two adjacent pole positions before and after it, a total of three consecutive pole positions, the curvature of the line at the current pole position is calculated using a geometric method. When the curvature of the line is less than a preset first curvature threshold, the turning angle is less than a preset first angle threshold, and the span distance is less than a preset span distance threshold, the line type of the path formed by the three pole positions is determined to be a straight segment. When the line curvature is greater than or equal to the preset first curvature threshold and less than the preset second curvature threshold, the turning angle is greater than or equal to the preset first angle threshold and less than the preset second angle threshold, and the span distance is less than the preset span distance threshold, the line type is determined to be a turning segment. When the span distance is greater than or equal to the preset span distance threshold, the line type is determined to be a crossing section; When the curvature of the line is greater than or equal to a preset second curvature threshold and the turning angle is greater than or equal to a preset second angle threshold, the line type is determined to be a special turning segment.

[0034] The preset first curvature threshold is a geometric boundary value used to determine the transition from a straight section to a corner section in a transmission line. It depends on the minimum turning requirements between towers and the allowable conductor offset rate in the transmission line design, and is usually set at 0.0005m. -1 up to 0.001m -1 In this embodiment, the value is set to 0.0008m.-1 The system can effectively identify sections of the line with slight bends. The preset first angle threshold is the dividing angle between straight sections and corner sections, depending on the electrical safety clearance and structural mechanical stability requirements of the line. It is typically set between 3° and 8°, and in this embodiment, it is set to 5°, accurately reflecting areas with slight line bends. The preset span distance threshold is the limit value for determining the conductor span of a crossing section, depending on the conductor's mechanical strength, tension control, and terrain elevation differences. It is typically set between 250m and 400m, and in this embodiment, it is set to 300m, distinguishing between ordinary sections and large-span sections. The preset second curvature threshold is the curvature limit value for determining the transition from a corner section to a special corner section, depending on the line's turning radius and the structural stress limit of the tower, and is typically set at 0.002m. -1 up to 0.004m -1 In this embodiment, the value is set to 0.003m. -1 It can accurately identify large turning angles and high stress areas; the preset second angle threshold is the critical angle value used to identify special turning angle sections. It depends on the upper limit of the stress of the tower tension structure and the safety tension control requirements of the conductor. It is usually set between 15° and 25°. In this embodiment, it is set to 20°, which can reliably identify the turning angle sections in the line that require special tower structures.

[0035] By comprehensively analyzing the spatial coordinates of three adjacent pole positions, turning angles, and span distances, a quantitative judgment mechanism between line geometry and structural classification was established. Curvature values ​​are calculated using three-point spatial coordinates to accurately express the degree of local bending of the line, thus reflecting the impact of line alignment changes on pole stress and layout. The introduction of turning angles allows the system to distinguish the degree of stress concentration under different turning characteristics. The span distance parameter reflects the impact of conductor span changes on pole tension and foundation stability. Through threshold zoning judgments of the three parameters—curvature, angle, and span distance—the system can automatically identify straight sections, turning sections, crossing sections, and special turning sections of the line, achieving adaptive correspondence between line morphology and structural function. This process organically combines spatial geometric relationships with mechanical characteristics, providing clear geometric constraints for subsequent pole and foundation selection, thereby improving the accuracy and rationality of the overall line design.

[0036] Specifically, the process of determining the environmental complexity level based on the terrain slope and the geological carrying capacity includes: The terrain complexity score is determined based on the terrain slope, wherein a first score is assigned when the terrain slope is less than a preset first slope threshold, a second score is assigned when the terrain slope is between the preset first slope threshold and a preset second slope threshold, and a third score is assigned when the terrain slope is greater than the preset second slope threshold. A geological complexity score is determined based on the geological bearing capacity, wherein a first score is assigned when the geological bearing capacity is greater than a preset first bearing capacity threshold, a second score is assigned when the geological bearing capacity is between the preset first bearing capacity threshold and a preset second bearing capacity threshold, and a third score is assigned when the geological bearing capacity is less than the preset second bearing capacity threshold. Calculate the weighted sum of the terrain complexity score and the geological complexity score, wherein the weight corresponding to the terrain complexity score is a preset terrain weight, and the weight corresponding to the geological complexity score is a preset geological weight; When the weighted sum is less than a preset first complexity threshold, the environment complexity level is determined to be simple. When the weighted sum is greater than or equal to a preset first complexity threshold and less than a preset second complexity threshold, the environmental complexity level is determined to be medium. When the weighted sum is greater than or equal to a preset second complexity threshold, the environmental complexity level is determined to be a complexity level.

[0037] The preset first slope threshold is a critical value used to determine changes in terrain undulation. It depends on the terrain type and construction stability requirements of the line area, and is typically set between 5° and 10°. In this embodiment, it is set to 8°, which can distinguish between gentle terrain and slightly undulating terrain. The preset second slope threshold is a boundary value used to identify steep slope terrain. It depends on the stress stability of the tower foundation under different slopes, and is typically set between 15° and 25°. In this embodiment, it is set to 20°, which can effectively distinguish between ordinary slopes and high-risk slope areas. The preset first bearing capacity threshold is a benchmark value used to judge the quality of foundation strength. It depends on the typical soil type and the tower foundation bearing capacity standard, and is typically set between 300 kPa and 500 kPa. In this embodiment, it is set to 400 kPa, which can identify high-bearing-capacity stable strata. The preset second bearing capacity threshold is a lower limit value used to distinguish weak bearing foundations. It depends on geological conditions and foundation safety factor requirements, and is typically set between 150 kPa and 300 kPa. In this embodiment, it is set to 200 kPa, which can identify low-strength, easily deformable soft strata. The preset terrain weight is... The preset geological weight is used to reflect the proportion of the influence of terrain slope in the environmental complexity calculation. It depends on the degree of influence of terrain on construction and structural stability, and is usually set between 0.4 and 0.6. In this embodiment, it is set to 0.5 to balance the importance of terrain and geology. The preset geological weight is used to reflect the contribution of geological bearing capacity in the complexity calculation. It depends on the degree of influence of foundation conditions on foundation selection and stress performance, and is usually set between 0.4 and 0.6. In this embodiment, it is set to 0.5 to ensure the balance and objectivity of complexity assessment. The preset first complexity threshold is a critical value used to distinguish between simple and medium environmental levels. It depends on the distribution characteristics of terrain and geological weighted scores, and is usually set between 1.5 and 2.0. In this embodiment, it is set to 1.8 to accurately identify areas suitable for standard foundations. The preset second complexity threshold is an upper limit used to distinguish between medium and complex environmental levels. It depends on the geological characteristics and construction risk control standards of typical mountain lines, and is usually set between 2.5 and 3.0. In this embodiment, it is set to 2.7 to identify complex sections that require reinforcement or composite foundations.

[0038] The preset first score is a numerical parameter used for preliminary assessment of terrain stability. It depends on the combined weight of slope and geological strength and is usually set between 0.3 and 0.5. In this embodiment, it is set to 0.4, which can achieve stability screening of the primary terrain zoning. The preset second score is a parameter used to determine the bearing capacity of the foundation in the middle layer. It depends on the stratum type and load distribution and is usually set between 0.5 and 0.7. In this embodiment, it is set to 0.6, which can accurately reflect the mechanical response of the foundation structure. The preset third score is a weighted score used for the final comprehensive assessment result. It depends on the combined contribution of terrain, geology and bearing capacity parameters and is usually set between 0.7 and 0.9. In this embodiment, it is set to 0.8, which can achieve the final determination of the comprehensive stability level of the region.

[0039] By combining topographic slope and geological bearing capacity analysis, the environmental complexity level is determined, achieving a comprehensive assessment of the environmental conditions of tower foundations from both geometric and mechanical perspectives. Topographic slope reflects the impact of surface undulations on foundation stability, while geological bearing capacity reflects the foundation's ability to withstand loads. In engineering, the two exhibit a negative correlation: the steeper the slope, the lower the bearing capacity, and the more complex the environmental construction and structural stress conditions. By setting grading thresholds and performing weighted calculations, the contribution of topographic and geological factors can be dynamically balanced under different scenarios, thus scientifically distinguishing between simple, moderate, and complex environmental levels. This judgment mechanism allows the system to automatically identify potentially high-risk areas during the design phase, improving the accuracy and safety of tower type and foundation structure matching, avoiding misjudgments caused by single parameter deviations, and providing a reliable basis for subsequent tower type optimization and structural safety verification.

[0040] Please see Figure 2 The flowchart shown is for selecting preliminary pole type and foundation structure schemes in this embodiment. In this embodiment, the process of selecting preliminary pole type and foundation structure schemes from a preset typical design library using a matching algorithm combining rules and weights, based on the line type and the environmental complexity level, includes: The corresponding pole type is determined according to the line type, where straight sections correspond to straight pole types, corner sections correspond to tension pole types, crossing sections correspond to crossing pole types, and special corner sections correspond to special pole types. Based on the environmental complexity level, the foundation structure type is determined according to the terrain slope and the geological bearing capacity; The pole type and the foundation structure type are combined to obtain the preliminary pole type scheme and the foundation structure scheme.

[0041] By combining spatial characteristics such as line curvature, turning angle, and span with environmental complexity levels, the system automatically selects the most suitable pole type and foundation type based on the functional compatibility between pole type and foundation structure. This ensures that poles in straight sections, turning sections, crossing sections, and special turning sections can withstand corresponding mechanical loads under different terrain slopes and geological bearing capacities, while maintaining the stability and economy of the overall structure. This achieves a high degree of matching and optimized combination between pole type and foundation structure.

[0042] Specifically, the process of determining the foundation structure type based on the environmental complexity level, the terrain slope, and the geological bearing capacity includes: A comprehensive judgment score is calculated based on the terrain slope and the geological bearing capacity according to a preset weight ratio. When the comprehensive judgment score is less than the preset first judgment threshold and the environmental complexity level is the simple level, an extended foundation is selected from the preset typical design library as the basic structure type. When the comprehensive judgment score is greater than or equal to the preset first judgment threshold and less than or equal to the preset second judgment threshold, or when the environmental complexity level is the medium level, pile foundation is selected as the foundation structure type from the preset typical design library; When the comprehensive judgment score is greater than the preset second judgment threshold, or when the environmental complexity level is the complexity level, a composite foundation is selected from the preset typical design library as the basic structure type.

[0043] The preset first judgment threshold is a lower limit reference value used to distinguish foundation types. It depends on the comprehensive characteristics of terrain slope and geological bearing capacity, and is usually set between 0.3 and 0.5. In this embodiment, it is set to 0.35, which can determine that when the environmental conditions are relatively gentle and the bearing capacity is high, the spread foundation should be selected first. The preset second judgment threshold is an upper limit reference value used to distinguish foundation types. It depends on the comprehensive characteristics of terrain slope and geological bearing capacity, and is usually set between 0.6 and 0.8. In this embodiment, it is set to 0.7, which can determine that when the environmental conditions are complex or the bearing capacity is low, the composite foundation should be selected to improve the structural stability.

[0044] The weight corresponding to the terrain slope depends on the degree of influence of terrain conditions on the stability of the foundation structure, and is usually set between 0.2 and 0.4. In this embodiment, it is set to 0.3, which can reasonably reflect the fundamental influence of terrain factors on foundation selection and avoid overestimating the proportion of terrain factors in the comprehensive judgment. The weight corresponding to the geological bearing capacity depends on the decisive role of geological conditions on the safety of the foundation structure, and is usually set between 0.6 and 0.8. In this embodiment, it is set to 0.7, which can highlight the key position of geological conditions in foundation selection and ensure that the selection of foundation structure type is more in line with engineering safety requirements.

[0045] By calculating a comprehensive judgment score based on the terrain slope and geological bearing capacity according to preset weights, and combining it with the environmental complexity level, the system automatically selects the most suitable foundation structure type. This enables extended foundations, pile foundations, and composite foundations to provide corresponding bearing capacity and stability for different slopes, bearing capacities, and complex environmental conditions, thereby ensuring balanced stress on the poles and stable and reliable foundations. At the same time, it takes into account construction economy and safety margin, achieving efficient matching between foundation structure type and site environment.

[0046] Specifically, based on the characteristic parameter correlation equation, the process of calculating the pole height parameter, foundation depth parameter, and pile length parameter according to the terrain slope, the geological bearing capacity, the environmental wind speed, and the ice thickness includes: The pole height parameter is determined by a preset wind load calculation formula based on the ambient wind speed, the ice thickness, and the preset load safety factor. The preset wind load calculation formula includes a wind speed correction factor and an ice load correction term. Based on the geological bearing capacity, soil layer distribution data, and preset foundation safety factor, the foundation depth parameter is determined by the preset foundation bearing capacity calculation formula, wherein the preset foundation bearing capacity calculation formula includes a geological condition correction coefficient and a soil layer distribution influence factor. Based on the terrain slope, the geological bearing capacity, and the preset slope stability coefficient, the pile length parameter is determined by the preset slope stability calculation formula, wherein the preset slope stability calculation formula includes a slope influence factor and a foundation bearing capacity correction term. Establish parameter association constraints to ensure that the pole height parameter, the foundation burial depth parameter, and the pile length parameter satisfy the preset collaborative working constraint equation.

[0047] In this embodiment, the preset wind load calculation formula is as follows:

[0048] Where Fw is the equivalent wind load borne by the top and body of the pole; Cd is the drag coefficient, which is set to 1.2 in this embodiment, considering the influence of the pole cross-sectional shape on the wind load; A is the wind-receiving area of ​​the pole body, which is calculated based on the pole size in this embodiment; ρ is the air density, which is set to 1.225 kg / m³ in this embodiment; V is the ambient wind speed; Kv is the wind speed correction factor, which is used to consider local wind speed changes or terrain effects, and is set to 1.0 in this embodiment; β is the preset icing density, which is set to 900 kg / m³ in this embodiment, used to convert the icing thickness into additional weight; t ice denoted as ice thickness; g is the acceleration due to gravity, which is set to 9.81 m / s² in this embodiment.

[0049] Based on the ambient wind speed, the ice thickness, and the preset load safety factor, the pole height parameters are determined using the preset wind load calculation formula as follows:

[0050] Where H0 is the initial reference height of the pole type, H is the pole height parameter, γ is the preset load safety factor, which is used to ensure that the pole height meets the requirements for wind resistance and icing resistance. In this embodiment, it is set to 1.2; Fallow is the allowable bearing capacity of the pole material, which is calculated based on the material strength and pole structure.

[0051] In this embodiment, based on the geological bearing capacity, soil layer distribution data, and preset foundation safety factor, the foundation depth parameters are determined using a preset foundation bearing capacity calculation formula as follows:

[0052] Where, q req D0 is the initial reference depth of the pole foundation, which is set according to the pole type and soil characteristics in this embodiment. D is the foundation depth parameter, γg is the foundation safety factor, which is set to 1.3 in this embodiment to ensure that the foundation remains safe and stable under the expected load and uneven settlement of the foundation. qallow is the allowable bearing capacity of the soil, which is determined according to the design specifications.

[0053] In this embodiment, the formula for calculating the bearing capacity of the foundation is as follows:

[0054] Where, q geo Ks is the geological bearing capacity, which is a geological condition correction coefficient used to take into account differences in geological properties. In this embodiment, it is set to 1.2 according to the soil type, which can correct the calculation of the foundation bearing capacity under different geological conditions, making the pile foundation design more reliable and safe. Kt is the soil layer distribution influence factor, which is used to take into account the influence of different soil layer thicknesses and distributions on the bearing capacity. In this embodiment, it is calculated based on soil layer distribution data.

[0055] In this embodiment, the pile length parameters are determined according to the terrain slope, the geological bearing capacity, and the preset slope stability coefficient, using the preset slope stability calculation formula as shown below:

[0056] Among them, L pile is the pile length parameter; FS is the preset slope stability coefficient, which is used to ensure the stability of the pile foundation on slopes or complex terrain. In this embodiment, it is set to 1.2, which can ensure that the pile foundation length meets the safety reserve requirements based on the terrain slope and geological bearing capacity, and prevent overturning or sliding.

[0057] By comprehensively considering various factors such as terrain slope, geological bearing capacity, environmental wind speed, and ice thickness, the pole height, foundation depth, and pile length are calculated in a coordinated manner. This ensures that the pole height can withstand environmental wind loads and ice loads, the foundation depth meets the requirements of soil bearing capacity and safety factor, and the pile length takes into account both slope stability and foundation bearing capacity. This achieves a reasonable match and dynamic balance among various parameters, thereby ensuring that the transmission line towers are both stable and economical under different environmental conditions, and improving the overall structural reliability and disaster resistance.

[0058] Please see Figure 3 As shown, this is a flowchart of the wind load resistance and overturning resistance verification performed in this embodiment. The process of sequentially performing wind load resistance and overturning resistance verification on the preliminary design scheme includes: Verify whether the strength of the pole material in the preliminary design is greater than or equal to a preset material strength threshold; Calculate the overturning moment ratio of the preliminary design scheme under the preset extreme wind load condition, and verify whether it is greater than or equal to the preset overturning safety factor. Calculate the maximum stress of the pole structure in the preliminary design scheme under the combined conditions of the ambient wind speed and the ice thickness, and verify whether it is less than the preset stress utilization threshold of the allowable stress of the material. If any check fails, the check is deemed to have failed.

[0059] The preset material strength threshold is the minimum strength standard required for the pole body. It depends on the pole material properties and load conditions, and is usually set between 300MPa and 600MPa. In this embodiment, it is set to 450MPa to ensure that the pole body does not suffer material damage under wind load and icing. The preset overturning safety factor is a coefficient used to verify the overturning resistance of the tower foundation. It depends on the pole height, foundation depth, and environmental load, and is usually set between 1.2 and 1.5. In this embodiment, it is set to 1.3 to ensure that the tower remains stable under extreme wind loads. The preset stress utilization rate threshold is the ratio of the allowable stress of the pole body to the ultimate strength of the material. It depends on the material properties and safety level requirements, and is usually set between 0.6 and 0.8. In this embodiment, it is set to 0.7 to control the stress of the pole body structure within a safe range and prevent excessive deformation or damage.

[0060] In this embodiment, the preset extreme wind load condition refers to the maximum possible wind force conditions considered in the design. It depends on the historical wind speed data, terrain features and meteorological statistics of the line location. It is usually set to a wind speed that occurs once every 50 to 70 years. In this embodiment, it is set to an extreme wind speed condition that occurs once every 60 years, which can ensure that the tower can still operate safely and stably under rare strong winds.

[0061] By sequentially performing wind load resistance and overturning resistance checks, it is ensured that the strength of the pole material, the overturning moment ratio, and the stress of the pole structure under the combined action of wind load and icing all meet safety requirements. The parameters are interrelated: material strength determines the pole's ability to resist stress, the overturning moment ratio reflects the matching relationship between the foundation and the pole height, and the maximum stress, along with the ambient wind speed and icing thickness, determines the stress state of the pole. This achieves the overall stability and safety of the tower under complex meteorological conditions, improving the reliability and feasibility of the design scheme.

[0062] Please see Figure 4 As shown, this is a flowchart of the automatic adjustment process in this embodiment. In this embodiment, the process of automatically adjusting the pole height parameter, the foundation depth parameter, and the pile length parameter when the verification fails includes: Establish a priority order for parameter adjustments, wherein the foundation depth parameter has the highest priority, followed by the pile length parameter, and the pole height parameter has the lowest priority. When the overturning moment ratio verification fails, the foundation burial depth parameter is increased by adjusting the step size according to the preset burial depth. When the maximum stress test of the pole body fails, the pile length parameter is increased by adjusting the step size according to the preset pile length. When the material strength test fails, the rod height parameter is reduced by adjusting the preset rod height step size. After each parameter adjustment, the relevant parameters are recalculated and verified until the verification is passed or the preset maximum number of adjustments is reached.

[0063] The preset burial depth adjustment step is used to increase the foundation burial depth parameter by an increment each time the overturning moment test fails. It depends on the soil type and geological conditions, and is usually set between 0.1m and 0.5m. In this embodiment, it is set to 0.2m to gradually improve the stability of the pole foundation and avoid excessive deepening. The preset pile length adjustment step is used to increase the pile length parameter by an increment each time the maximum stress test of the pole body fails. It depends on the slope gradient and the stress condition of the pile foundation, and is usually set between 0.2m and 1.0m. In this embodiment, it is set to 0.5m to enhance the bearing capacity of the pole foundation and improve the pole body. Stress distribution; the preset pole height adjustment step size is used to reduce the pole height parameter by a certain amount each time the material strength test fails. It depends on the pole size and material properties, and is usually set between 0.1m and 0.5m. In this embodiment, it is set to 0.2m, which can effectively control the force on the pole and optimize the stress state of the structure; the preset maximum number of adjustments is the upper limit of the number of consecutive parameter adjustments. It depends on the design safety redundancy and construction feasibility, and is usually set between 5 and 20 times. In this embodiment, it is set to 10 times, which can ensure that automatic optimization is completed in a limited number of steps and avoid ineffective repeated adjustments.

[0064] By establishing a priority adjustment mechanism for parameters such as pole height, foundation depth, and pile length, automatic optimization of the preliminary design scheme is achieved when requirements for overturning moment, pole stress, and material strength are not met. Prioritizing foundation depth adjustment effectively improves pole foundation stability, pile length adjustment enhances slope and soil bearing capacity, and pole height adjustment controls the stress distribution on the pole. Each parameter modification is followed by recalculation and verification to ensure consistency in stress and geometric conditions, thereby guaranteeing reliable structural safety and construction feasibility of the tower under complex environments and extreme loads.

[0065] Specifically, the process of verifying the cost compliance and industry standard compliance of the preliminary design scheme that has passed the verification includes: The sum of the material cost and construction cost of a single pole in the preliminary design scheme is calculated to obtain the total cost estimate. The total cost estimate is then compared with the preset typical design cost benchmark to calculate the cost overrun rate. When the verification cost excess rate is less than or equal to the preset cost excess rate threshold, the preset industry standard database is called to verify whether the pole height parameter, the foundation burial depth parameter, and the pile length parameter meet the preset design standard requirements. Verify whether the structural forms of the poles and foundations in the preliminary design scheme meet the preset construction requirements; When both cost compliance verification and industry standard compliance verification are passed, the preliminary design scheme is confirmed to have passed verification. If any verification fails, the preliminary design scheme is deemed to have failed the compliance verification.

[0066] The preset typical design cost benchmark refers to a reference value for the material cost and construction cost of a single pole, determined in advance based on historical engineering data and construction experience of typical pole types. This benchmark is used to compare and evaluate the total cost of the preliminary design scheme. In this embodiment, the benchmark depends on the pole size, material type, and construction process, and is usually set to the average cost range of similar transmission line projects. In this embodiment, based on actual engineering data from the past three years, it is set to RMB 50,000 to 80,000 per pole, which can be used to quickly determine whether the design scheme exceeds the cost limit. The preset industry standard database refers to a standardized data set containing requirements for transmission line pole design, foundation construction, material selection, and installation. This database is used to verify whether the design scheme complies with industry standards. In this embodiment, this database depends on the State Grid and local power design specifications, and typically includes parameters such as allowable pole height, foundation depth, pile length, and load-bearing capacity for various pole types. This embodiment uses the latest industry standard data, enabling automatic comparison and compliance judgment of design scheme parameters. The preset design specification requirements refer to the specific parameter requirements for pole design and foundation construction based on national or industry standards, including constraints such as pole height, foundation depth, pile length, material grade, and load capacity. In this embodiment, the requirement depends on the line grade, terrain environment, and wind and icing conditions, and is usually set within the allowable range specified in the standards. In this embodiment, it is implemented according to the 220kV line standard, which can ensure that the design scheme meets the standard requirements in terms of safety, stability, and durability. The preset structural requirements refer to the specific structural constraints proposed for pole type and foundation structure, pole and tower connection method, construction layout, and load transfer path. In this embodiment, the requirement depends on the pole type, environmental complexity level, and construction conditions, and is usually set within the allowable range of pole and tower structure safety and construction feasibility. In this embodiment, it is set according to the construction process specifications for tension poles, crossing poles, and composite foundations, which can ensure that the structural form of the design scheme is reasonable and the construction is feasible.

[0067] By verifying the cost compliance and industry standard compliance of the preliminary design scheme, a balance between economy and safety was achieved in the design parameters. The total cost estimate combined the material cost of a single pole with the construction cost, ensuring that the pole height, foundation depth, and pile length parameters met the structural load-bearing and anti-overturning requirements while avoiding excessive costs. At the same time, by verifying each parameter and the pole foundation structure through the industry standard database, it was ensured that the selected pole type and foundation type could reasonably distribute the load, maintain overall stability and safety, and achieve a coordinated match between material usage, construction cost, and structural dimensions, thereby ensuring that the design is both economical and reasonable and meets construction and safety standards.

[0068] Specifically, the process of generating a manual intervention warning and recording abnormal cases to the preset typical design library when the verification fails includes: When the preliminary design scheme fails the compliance verification, a manual intervention warning is generated, which includes the parameters of the current preliminary design scheme, the reason for the verification failure, and recommended handling measures. Record the complete design data of the current pole position, including the original input parameters, the design schemes of each adjustment, and the verification results of each time, forming anomaly cases; The abnormal cases are added to the abnormal case library of the preset typical design library, and case feature tags are marked.

[0069] In this embodiment, when the preliminary design scheme fails the compliance verification, the system automatically generates a manual intervention warning. This warning includes all parameter values ​​of the current preliminary design scheme, including pole height, foundation depth, pile length, and the typical scheme identifier used, as well as specific verification failure items and cause analysis, and several recommended handling measures based on the rule base and historical anomaly handling experience. At the same time, the system stores the complete design data of the pole position in the database in the form of a structured record. The record includes the original input parameters, the specific values ​​and adjustment time of each parameter adjustment, the numerical results and judgment conclusions of each verification, and the context information that triggered the warning, such as environmental conditions and the algorithm version used, forming a complete anomaly case. The anomaly case is added to the anomaly case library in the preset typical design library, and case feature tags and metadata are automatically generated and attached. Examples of feature tags include high slope-low load, wind and ice superposition, and excessive distance crossing. Metadata includes timestamp, processing status, and responsible engineer, so as to facilitate subsequent retrieval, statistical analysis, and optimization of rule and weight matching algorithms.

[0070] By automatically generating manual intervention warnings when preliminary design schemes fail compliance verification, and recording complete anomaly cases, including original input parameters, results of previous parameter adjustments, and verification feedback, in a pre-set typical design library, a systematic management of abnormal design situations is achieved. Through the recording and tagging of pole position design data, verification results, and recommended handling measures, references can be provided for subsequent designs, optimizing the richness and coverage of the typical design library. Simultaneously, a dynamic correlation is established between pole type, foundation parameters, and environmental conditions, making anomaly handling and subsequent design adjustments more precise and efficient.

[0071] The above description is merely a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the invention. Various modifications and variations can be made to the present invention by those skilled in the art. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc., made within the spirit and principles of the present invention should be included within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for automatically generating a pile type foundation based on multi-source fusion, characterized in that, The method comprises: obtaining the spatial coordinates, the angle of rotation, the span distance, the terrain slope, the geological bearing capacity, the environmental wind speed and the ice thickness of each pole position of the power transmission line in real time; determining the line type according to the spatial coordinates, the angle of rotation and the span distance of any three adjacent pole positions; determining the environmental complexity level according to the terrain slope and the geological bearing capacity; selecting a preliminary pole type scheme and a basic structure scheme from a preset typical design library by using a matching algorithm combining rules and weights according to the line type and the environmental complexity level; calculating the pole height parameter, the foundation burying depth parameter and the pile length parameter according to the terrain slope, the geological bearing capacity, the environmental wind speed and the ice thickness based on a characteristic parameter correlation equation, and generating a preliminary design scheme according to the calculation result, the preliminary pole type scheme and the basic structure scheme; performing wind load resistance checking and overturning resistance checking on the preliminary design scheme in sequence, automatically adjusting the pole height parameter, the foundation burying depth parameter and the pile length parameter when the checking fails, and re-performing the checking until the checking passes; performing cost compliance checking and industry standard compliance checking on the preliminary design scheme that passes the checking, generating an artificial intervention warning when the checking fails, recording an abnormal case to the preset typical design library, and outputting the preliminary design scheme as a final design scheme when the checking passes.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein, The process of determining the line type according to the spatial coordinates, the angle of rotation and the span distance of any three adjacent pole positions comprises: calculating the line curvature at the current pole position by using a geometric method based on the spatial coordinates of the current pole position and its adjacent front and rear two pole positions, i.e. three continuous pole positions; when the line curvature is less than a preset first curvature threshold, the angle of rotation is less than a preset first angle threshold and the span distance is less than a preset span distance threshold, determining that the line type of the path formed by the three pole positions is a straight line segment; when the line curvature is greater than or equal to the preset first curvature threshold and less than a preset second curvature threshold, the angle of rotation is greater than or equal to the preset first angle threshold and less than a preset second angle threshold and the span distance is less than the preset span distance threshold, determining that the line type is a corner segment; when the span distance is greater than or equal to the preset span distance threshold, determining that the line type is a crossing segment; when the line curvature is greater than or equal to a preset second curvature threshold and the angle of rotation is greater than or equal to a preset second angle threshold, determining that the line type is a special corner segment.

3. The method according to claim 2, wherein, The process of determining the environmental complexity level according to the terrain slope and the geological bearing capacity comprises: determining the terrain complexity score based on the terrain slope, wherein a first score is assigned when the terrain slope is less than a preset first slope threshold, a second score is assigned when the terrain slope is between the preset first slope threshold and a preset second slope threshold, and a third score is assigned when the terrain slope is greater than the preset second slope threshold; determining a geological complexity score based on the geological bearing capacity, wherein a first score is assigned when the geological bearing capacity is greater than a preset first bearing capacity threshold, a second score is assigned when the geological bearing capacity is between the preset first bearing capacity threshold and a preset second bearing capacity threshold, and a third score is assigned when the geological bearing capacity is less than the preset second bearing capacity threshold; calculating a weighted sum of the terrain complexity score and the geological complexity score, wherein the terrain complexity score corresponds to a preset terrain weight, and the geological complexity score corresponds to a preset geological weight; determining the environment complexity level as a simple level when the weighted sum is less than a preset first complexity threshold; determining the environment complexity level as a medium level when the weighted sum is greater than or equal to the preset first complexity threshold and less than a preset second complexity threshold; determining the environment complexity level as a complex level when the weighted sum is greater than or equal to the preset second complexity threshold.

4. The method according to claim 3, wherein, The process of selecting a preliminary pole type scheme and a basic structure scheme from a preset typical design library based on the line type and the environment complexity level by using a matching algorithm combining rules and weights comprises: determining a corresponding pole type category according to the line type, wherein a straight segment corresponds to a straight pole type, a corner segment corresponds to a strain pole type, a crossing segment corresponds to a crossing pole type, and a special corner segment corresponds to a special pole type; determining a basic structure type based on the environment complexity level, the terrain slope, and the geological bearing capacity; combining the pole type category and the basic structure type to obtain the preliminary pole type scheme and the basic structure scheme.

5. The method according to claim 4, wherein, The process of determining a basic structure type based on the environment complexity level, the terrain slope, and the geological bearing capacity comprises: calculating a comprehensive determination score according to the terrain slope and the geological bearing capacity in a preset weight ratio; selecting an expanded foundation as the basic structure type from the preset typical design library when the comprehensive determination score is less than a preset first determination threshold and the environment complexity level is the simple level; selecting a pile foundation as the basic structure type from the preset typical design library when the comprehensive determination score is greater than or equal to a preset first determination threshold and less than or equal to a preset second determination threshold, or the environment complexity level is the medium level; selecting a composite foundation as the basic structure type from the preset typical design library when the comprehensive determination score is greater than the preset second determination threshold, or the environment complexity level is the complex level.

6. The method according to claim 5, wherein, The process of calculating a pole height parameter, a foundation burying depth parameter, and a pile length parameter based on a characteristic parameter correlation equation, the terrain slope, the geological bearing capacity, the environment wind speed, and the ice thickness comprises: determining the pole height parameter by a preset wind load calculation formula based on the environment wind speed, the ice thickness, and a preset load safety factor, wherein the preset wind load calculation formula includes a wind speed correction factor and an ice load correction term; According to the geological bearing capacity, the soil layer distribution data and a preset foundation safety coefficient, the foundation burying depth parameter is determined through a preset foundation bearing capacity calculation formula, wherein the preset foundation bearing capacity calculation formula comprises a geological condition correction coefficient and a soil layer distribution influence factor; According to the terrain slope, the geological bearing capacity and a preset slope stability coefficient, the pile length parameter is determined through a preset slope stability calculation formula, wherein the preset slope stability calculation formula comprises a slope influence factor and a foundation bearing capacity correction term; Parameter correlation constraint conditions are established to ensure that the pole height parameter, the foundation burying depth parameter and the pile length parameter satisfy a preset collaborative work constraint equation.

7. The method according to claim 6, wherein, The process of sequentially performing wind load resistance checking and overturning resistance checking on the preliminary design scheme comprises: checking whether the strength of the pole body material in the preliminary design scheme is greater than or equal to a preset material strength threshold value; calculating the overturning resistance moment ratio of the preliminary design scheme under a preset extreme wind load working condition, and checking whether it is greater than or equal to a preset overturning resistance safety coefficient; calculating the maximum stress of the pole body structure in the preliminary design scheme under the combination of the environmental wind speed and the ice thickness, and checking whether it is less than a preset stress utilization rate threshold value of the material allowable stress; when any checking does not satisfy, it is determined that the checking fails.

8. The method according to claim 7, wherein, The process of automatically adjusting the pole height parameter, the foundation burying depth parameter and the pile length parameter when the checking fails comprises: establishing a priority order of parameter adjustment, wherein the adjustment priority of the foundation burying depth parameter is the highest, the pile length parameter is the second, and the pole height parameter is the lowest; when the overturning resistance moment ratio checking fails, the foundation burying depth parameter is preferentially increased according to a preset burying depth adjustment step; when the pole body maximum stress checking fails, the pile length parameter is increased according to a preset pile length adjustment step; when the material strength checking fails, the pole height parameter is decreased according to a preset pole height adjustment step; after each parameter adjustment, the relevant parameters are recalculated and the checking is performed until the checking is passed or a preset maximum adjustment number is reached.

9. The method according to claim 8, wherein, The process of performing cost compliance checking and industry specification compliance checking on the preliminary design scheme that passes the checking comprises: calculating the sum of the single-pole material cost and the construction cost of the preliminary design scheme to obtain a total cost estimate, and comparing the total cost estimate with a preset typical design cost benchmark to calculate a cost over-standard rate; when the checking cost over-standard rate is less than or equal to a preset cost over-standard rate threshold value, a preset industry specification database is called to check whether the pole height parameter, the foundation burying depth parameter and the pile length parameter meet the requirements of a preset design specification; checking whether the pole type and the structure form of the foundation in the preliminary design scheme satisfy a preset construction requirement; when the cost compliance checking and the industry specification compliance checking both pass, it is confirmed that the preliminary design scheme passes the checking; when any checking fails, it is determined that the preliminary design scheme does not pass the compliance checking.

10. The method according to claim 9, wherein, The process of generating a manual intervention warning and recording an abnormal case to the preset typical design library when the checking fails comprises: When the preliminary design scheme fails to pass the compliance check, the artificial intervention warning is generated, which contains the parameters of the current preliminary design scheme, the reason for the check failure, and recommended treatment measures; Record the complete design data of the current rod position, including the original input parameters, the design scheme after each adjustment, and the check results of each time, to form an abnormal case; Add the abnormal case to the abnormal case library of the preset typical design library, and mark the case feature label.

Images