Corridor zone comparison and selection method applied to highway reconstruction planning

Abstract

The invention relates to the field of engineering planning design, in particular to a corridor zone comparison and selection method applied to highway reconstruction planning, and the method specifically comprises the following steps: obtaining a geological risk score according to an information amount value for measuring the geological disaster susceptibility degree; obtaining an economic cost score according to the demolition cost and the engineering cost; obtaining an environmental protection score according to the influence on the ecological environment and the generated noise influence; obtaining a social influence score according to the density of the to-be-demolited population and the resettlement difficulty; performing weighted summation on the sum to obtain a corresponding route total score; the total route scores of different routes are compared to obtain the optimal center line, so that the optimal center line can be obtained as far as possible after multiple factors are comprehensively considered.

Description

TECHNICAL FIELD

[0001] The application relates to the field of engineering planning and design, and in particular to a corridor comparison and selection method applied to expressway reconstruction planning. BACKGROUND

[0002] During expressway reconstruction, engineering feasibility research needs to be carried out, one step of which is to plan a corridor between the starting point and the ending point of the expressway, the width of the corridor is usually more than 1 km, and then 2-3 specific routes are set in the corridor for comparison and selection, so as to finally obtain an optimal center line scheme, and then detailed design can be carried out on the center line scheme.

[0003] For example, a mountainous expressway geological route selection method based on time series InSAR technology disclosed in CN119128201A obtains a quantitative index for measuring the degree of geological disaster occurrence by calculating the information value , and the larger the information value , the more likely it is to occur geological disasters, and it is used as an index for expressway geological route selection.

[0004] During the comparison and selection of the corridor, the degree of geological disaster occurrence in the area through which the route passes cannot be simply considered, and other factors also need to be comprehensively evaluated to select the optimal center line. SUMMARY

[0005] In order to comprehensively compare and select the corridor with multiple factors to obtain the optimal center line, the application provides a corridor comparison and selection method applied to expressway reconstruction planning.

[0006] The corridor comparison and selection method applied to expressway reconstruction planning provided by the application adopts the following technical scheme.

[0007] A corridor comparison and selection method applied to expressway reconstruction planning, specifically comprising the following steps.

[0008] S1, obtaining a geological risk score according to an information value for measuring the degree of geological disaster occurrence ;

[0009] S2, obtaining an economic cost score according to a demolition cost and an engineering cost ;

[0010] S3, obtaining an environmental protection score according to an influence on the ecological environment and noise generated ;

[0011] S4, obtaining a social influence score according to a population density to be demolished and resettlement difficulty ;

[0012] S5, will , , and The weighted sum is used to obtain the total score for the corresponding route.

[0013] S6. Compare the total scores of different routes to obtain the optimal centerline.

[0014] By adopting the above technical solutions, a comprehensive evaluation of different routes is conducted based on four factors: economic cost, environmental impact, social impact, and geological risk, in order to obtain the optimal centerline more objectively.

[0015] Optionally, the geological risk score The calculation formula is:

[0016] .

[0017] By adopting the above technical solutions, the more prone the route is to geological disasters, the higher the information content value. The larger, the opposite. The smaller it is.

[0018] Optionally, the economic cost score The calculation formula is:

[0019] ;

[0020] in, The maximum total cost among all routes and total costs. For the first Total cost of the route It represents the minimum total cost among all routes and total costs.

[0021] By adopting the above technical solution, the economic cost is normalized, and the higher the estimated cost of the route, the lower the cost. The lower.

[0022] Optionally, the The calculation formula is:

[0023] ;

[0024] ;

[0025] in, For the first The cost of demolition along the route, For the first The cost of the roadbed construction, For the first The engineering costs for the bridges and tunnels along the route, For the first Costs of the route's ancillary facilities, For the first The first in the route The area of ​​the demolition zone of this type, For the first The standard value of compensation per unit area for demolition areas of this type.

[0026] By adopting the above technical solutions, the costs of demolition, roadbed, bridges, tunnels, and ancillary facilities can be calculated in a unified manner.

[0027] Optionally, the The calculation formula is:

[0028] ;

[0029] in, For the first The amount of earthwork for the route, For the first The standard value of the comprehensive cost required to complete earthwork excavation, loading, and transportation operations for a unit volume of work along the route. For the first The amount of stonework for the route, For the first The standard value of the comprehensive cost required to complete the excavation, loading, and transportation of rock for a unit volume of work along the route. For the first The weighted average haul distance from the route to the spoil disposal site or borrow site.

[0030] By adopting the above technical solutions, a preliminary estimate of the roadbed cost can be made.

[0031] Optionally, the and The calculation formula is:

[0032] ;

[0033] ;

[0034] in, For the first Length of the centerline of the route For the first The bridge-to-tunnel ratio of the route The regression value is the standard span cost model of the Road Network Center of the Ministry of Transport. This represents the average bid price for ancillary facilities of highways of the same grade within the same region.

[0035] By adopting the above technical solutions, a preliminary estimate of the construction costs of bridges, tunnels, and ancillary facilities can be made.

[0036] Optionally, the The calculation formula is:

[0037] ;

[0038] ;

[0039] in, For the first Ecological sensitivity score of the route For the first Noise pollution score of the route, For ecological red lines and the first Points are deducted for overlap between buffer zones around the route centerline. For the first Points will be deducted for the distance to the buffer zone surrounding the route centerline and the boundary of the nearest drinking water source protection area. For the first Points will be deducted for overlap between the buffer zone around the centerline of the route and the habitat of rare species.

[0040] By adopting the above technical solutions, a preliminary assessment was conducted on the impact on the surrounding ecological environment and the noise pollution generated.

[0041] Optionally, the The calculation formula is:

[0042] ;

[0043] ;

[0044] ;

[0045] in, For the first On the route The daytime unit overscalar quantity in the region For the first On the route The number of nighttime units in the area exceeded the standard. For the first On the route The length of the centerline of the region, For the first Length of the centerline of the route For the first On the route Predicted daytime noise levels for the region For the first On the route The standard daytime noise level for the area For the first On the route Predicted nighttime noise levels for the area For the first On the route The standard value for nighttime noise in the area.

[0046] By adopting the above technical solution, nighttime and daytime noise can be compared with the standard values ​​of nighttime and daytime noise to obtain the corresponding noise score. The more serious the noise exceedance, the lower the score.

[0047] Optionally, the The calculation formula is:

[0048] ;

[0049] ;

[0050] ;

[0051] in, Population pressure coefficient To assess the difficulty level of resettlement, For the first The population of the demolition area along the route. For the first The total population of the streets the route passes through. For the first The availability of resettlement housing along the streets the route passes through. For the first The proportion of special groups in the population of the demolition area along the route. For the first The number of historical disputes related to demolition in the streets along the route.

[0052] By adopting the above technical solutions, a comprehensive evaluation is conducted, taking into account the number of people affected by the demolition and the difficulty of resettling the demolition personnel.

[0053] Optionally, in S5, the first Total score of the route The calculation formula is:

[0054] ;

[0055] in, Geological risk coefficient, This is the economic cost coefficient. For environmental protection constraints, This represents the social impact coefficient.

[0056] By adopting the above technical solution, in order to , , and The weighted sum is used to obtain the total score for the corresponding route.

[0057] In summary, this application includes at least the following beneficial effects.

[0058] The optimal centerline is determined more objectively by comprehensively evaluating different routes based on four factors: economic cost, environmental impact, social impact, and geological risk. Attached Figure Description

[0059] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of the main steps of this application. Detailed Implementation

[0060] The present application will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0061] This application discloses a corridor selection method applied to highway reconstruction planning, referring to... Figure 1 Specifically, it includes the following steps.

[0062] S1. Based on the information value for measuring the susceptibility to geological disasters Obtaining a geological risk score .

[0063] Among them, information content value It can be obtained based on the calculation method in the background technology, along the first The route's centerline is divided into cells, and the number of landslides in each cell over the past 10 years can be exported from the provincial geological hazard database. The following formula is then used to calculate... .

[0064] ;

[0065] No. The more frequently geological disasters occur in the areas traversed by the route, the better. The larger, The smaller, the more the first The total score for the route will decrease.

[0066] S2. Obtain an economic cost score based on demolition costs and project costs. .

[0067] in, The total cost of the route needs to be normalized. The calculation formula is as follows.

[0068] ;

[0069] in, The maximum total cost among all routes and total costs. For the first Total cost of the route It represents the minimum total cost among all routes and total costs.

[0070] The calculation formula is as follows.

[0071] ;

[0072] in, For the first The cost of demolition along the route, For the first The cost of the roadbed construction, For the first The engineering costs for the bridges and tunnels along the route, For the first Costs of the route's ancillary facilities.

[0073] The calculation formula is as follows.

[0074] ;

[0075] Among them, the first The demolition areas involved in the route are divided into different zones according to different types of buildings, such as residential land, commercial land, industrial and mining storage land, public management and public service land, transportation land, and water area and water conservancy facilities land, etc., totaling [number missing]. area, The maximum value can be determined by consulting relevant documents on the comprehensive land price of the land acquisition area in the province where the route is located. For the first The first in the route The area of ​​the demolition zone of this type, For the first The standard value of compensation per unit area for demolition areas of this type.

[0076] The calculation formula is as follows.

[0077] ;

[0078] in, For the first The amount of earthwork for the route, For the first The amount of stonework for the route is obtained in the same way for both methods. Taking this as an example, we can first extract the longitudinal and cross-sectional engineering values ​​of the route project using common engineering quantity calculation software. The total excavation volume is the sum of the excavation volumes of the longitudinal and cross-sections, and the total fill volume is the sum of the fill volumes of the longitudinal and cross-sections. The final... It is the difference between the total excavation volume and the total filling volume.

[0079] For the first The standard value of the comprehensive cost required to complete earthwork excavation, loading, and transportation operations for a unit volume of work along the route. For the first The standard value of the comprehensive cost required to complete the excavation, loading, and transportation of rock for a unit volume of work along the route. and All of these can be obtained by consulting the base prices for earthwork and rock excavation, loading and transportation in the "Highway Engineering Budget Quota" (JTG / T3832-2023).

[0080] For the first The weighted average haul distance from the route to the spoil disposal or borrowing site can be specifically measured using route CAD or GIS software to determine the actual transport path from each spoil disposal or borrowing site to the construction section. Record the volume of earthwork transported to each spoil or borrow site. And as a basis for weighting, ultimately The calculation formula is as follows.

[0081] .

[0082] The calculation formula is as follows.

[0083] ;

[0084] in, For the first Length of the centerline of the route For the first The bridge-to-tunnel ratio in a route is the proportion of the length of bridges and tunnels in the total length of the route. The regression value of the standard span cost model of the Road Network Center of the Ministry of Transport is based on... The corresponding regression value is obtained by querying the corresponding range in the corresponding table.

[0085] The calculation formula is as follows.

[0086] ;

[0087] in, This refers to the average bid price of ancillary facilities for highways of the same grade within the same region. For example, the average bid price of monitoring, communication, guardrails, and lighting for highways of the same grade within the province over the past three years can be directly provided by the provincial cost information platform.

[0088] S3. Obtain environmental protection scores based on the impact on the ecological environment and the noise impact generated. .

[0089] The calculation formula is as follows.

[0090] ;

[0091] in, For the first Ecological sensitivity score of the route For the first Noise pollution score for the route.

[0092] The calculation formula is as follows.

[0093] ;

[0094] in, For ecological red lines and the first Overlapping penalties between buffer zones around the route centerline; for example, defining the distance to the first... A 100m buffer zone is designated as the route centerline. When there is overlap between the ecological red line and the buffer zone... The value is 30, otherwise it is 0.

[0095] For the first Points are deducted based on the distance between the buffer zone surrounding the route centerline and the nearest drinking water source protection zone boundary. For example, the distance between the buffer zone and the drinking water source protection zone boundary is... If the distance threshold between the buffer zone and the drinking water source protection zone boundary is 100m, then when When greater than or equal to 100, =0; when At 100 o'clock, The calculation formula is as follows.

[0096] .

[0097] For the first Points will be deducted for overlap between the buffer zone around the route centerline and the habitat of rare species. When the buffer zone overlaps with the habitat of rare species, It takes the value 15, otherwise it is 0.

[0098] The calculation formula is as follows.

[0099]

[0100] The area traversed by the route is divided into zones according to acoustic functional zones. For example, according to standard GB 3096-2008, it can be divided into residential and educational zones, mixed commercial and residential zones, industrial zones, and main traffic artery zones. For the first On the route The daytime unit overscalar quantity in the region For the first On the route The number of nighttime units in the area exceeded the standard. For the first On the route The length of the centerline of the region.

[0101] The calculation formula is as follows.

[0102] ;

[0103] in, For the first On the route The predicted daytime noise value for the region can be first calculated based on the first... On the route The basic data such as regional traffic flow, vehicle speed, road type, surrounding terrain, and building distribution are set. Traffic flow can be based on the surrounding road network and the first... The correlation between routes and historical traffic flow data of similar road sections is used to build a correlation model for prediction. Then, a noise prediction model is selected, such as the highway traffic noise prediction model recommended in standard GB 3096-2008, and the parameters for setting and prediction are substituted to obtain... .

[0104] For the first On the route The daytime noise standard values ​​for a region can be obtained according to standard GB 3096-2008 for different categories of regions. .

[0105] The calculation formula is as follows.

[0106] ;

[0107] in, For the first On the route Predicted nighttime noise levels for the area For the first On the route The standard value for nighttime noise in the area. and For details, please refer to and How to obtain it.

[0108] S4. Obtain a social impact score based on the population density and resettlement difficulty of the area to be demolished. .

[0109] The calculation formula is as follows.

[0110] ;

[0111] in, Population pressure coefficient The difficulty level of the resettlement.

[0112] The calculation formula is as follows.

[0113] ;

[0114] Where the first can be defined The area within 300 meters of the centerline of the route is a demolition zone. For the first The population of the demolition area along the route. For the first The total population of the streets the route passes through. and This information can be obtained through gridded data from the population census.

[0115] The calculation formula is as follows.

[0116] ;

[0117] in, For the first The availability of resettlement housing along the streets the route passes through can be queried in real time through the affordable housing management system. For the first The proportion of special groups in the population of the demolition area along the route can be obtained by querying and matching their ID numbers in the database. For the first The number of historical disputes related to demolition in the streets along the route can be obtained by searching court documents related to demolition cases within the past 5 years.

[0118] S5, will , , and The weighted sum is used to obtain the total score for the corresponding route.

[0119] Total route score The calculation formula is as follows.

[0120] ;

[0121] in, This is the geological risk coefficient, with a value ranging from 0.4 to 0.6, and is generally set to 0.5. This is the economic cost coefficient, with a value ranging from 0.2 to 0.3, and is generally set to 0.25. This is the environmental protection constraint coefficient, with a value range of 0.15-0.25 that can be slightly adjusted, and is generally taken as 0.2. This is the social impact coefficient, with a value ranging from 0.05 to 0.1 and subject to slight adjustments; it is generally set to 0.75.

[0122] S6. Compare the total scores of different routes to obtain the optimal centerline.

[0123] The above are all preferred embodiments of this application, and are not intended to limit the scope of protection of this application. Therefore, all equivalent changes made in accordance with the structure, shape and principle of this application should be covered within the scope of protection of this application.

Claims

1. A method for corridor selection applied to highway reconstruction planning, characterized in that: Specifically, the following steps are included: S1. Based on the information value for measuring the susceptibility to geological disasters Obtaining a geological risk score ; S2. Obtain an economic cost score based on demolition costs and project costs. ; S3. Obtain environmental protection scores based on the impact on the ecological environment and the noise impact generated. ; S4. Obtain a social impact score based on the population density to be demolished and the difficulty of resettlement. ; S5, will , , and The weighted sum is used to obtain the total score for the corresponding route. S6. Compare the total scores of different routes to obtain the optimal centerline.

2. The corridor selection method for highway reconstruction planning according to claim 1, characterized in that: The geological risk score The calculation formula is: 。 3. The corridor selection method for highway reconstruction planning according to claim 1, characterized in that: The economic cost score The calculation formula is: ； in, The maximum total cost among all routes and total costs. For the first Total cost of the route It represents the minimum total cost among all routes and total costs.

4. The corridor selection method for highway reconstruction planning according to claim 3, characterized in that: The The calculation formula is: ； ； in, For the first The cost of demolition along the route, For the first The cost of the roadbed construction, For the first The engineering costs for the bridges and tunnels along the route, For the first Costs of the route's ancillary facilities, For the first The first in the route The area of ​​the demolition zone of this type, For the first The standard value of compensation per unit area for demolition areas of this type.

5. The corridor selection method for highway reconstruction planning according to claim 4, characterized in that: The The calculation formula is: ； in, For the first The amount of earthwork for the route, For the first The standard value of the comprehensive cost required to complete earthwork excavation, loading, and transportation operations for a unit volume of work along the route. For the first The amount of stonework for the route, For the first The standard value of the comprehensive cost required to complete the excavation, loading, and transportation of rock for a unit volume of work along the route. For the first The weighted average haul distance from the route to the spoil disposal site or borrow site.

6. The corridor selection method for highway reconstruction planning according to claim 4, characterized in that: The and The calculation formula is: ； ； in, For the first Length of the centerline of the route For the first The bridge-to-tunnel ratio of the route The regression value is the standard span cost model of the Road Network Center of the Ministry of Transport. This represents the average bid price for ancillary facilities of highways of the same grade within the same region.

7. The corridor selection method for highway reconstruction planning according to claim 1, characterized in that: The The calculation formula is: ； ； in, For the first Ecological sensitivity score of the route For the first Noise pollution score of the route, For ecological red lines and the first Points are deducted for overlap between buffer zones around the route centerline. For the first Points will be deducted for the distance to the buffer zone surrounding the route centerline and the boundary of the nearest drinking water source protection area. For the first Points will be deducted for overlap between the buffer zone around the centerline of the route and the habitat of rare species.

8. The corridor selection method for highway reconstruction planning according to claim 7, characterized in that: The The calculation formula is: ； ； ； in, For the first On the route The daytime unit overscalar quantity in the region For the first On the route The number of nighttime units in the area exceeded the standard. For the first On the route The length of the centerline of the region, For the first Length of the centerline of the route For the first On the route Predicted daytime noise levels for the region For the first On the route The standard daytime noise level for the area For the first On the route Predicted nighttime noise levels for the area For the first On the route The standard value for nighttime noise in the area.

9. The corridor selection method for highway reconstruction planning according to claim 1, characterized in that: The The calculation formula is: ； ； ； in, Population pressure coefficient To assess the difficulty level of the resettlement, For the first The population in the demolition area along the route. For the first The total population of the streets the route passes through. For the first The availability of resettlement housing along the streets the route passes through. For the first The proportion of special groups in the population of the demolition area along the route. For the first The number of historical disputes related to demolition in the streets along the route.

10. The corridor selection method for highway reconstruction planning according to claim 1, characterized in that: The S5 in Total score of the route The calculation formula is: ； in, Geological risk coefficient, This is the economic cost coefficient. For environmental protection constraints, This represents the social impact coefficient.

Images