Multi-dimensional detection and quantitative evaluation method for grouting treatment effect of fault fracture zone water damage

Abstract

The application discloses a kind of fault fracture zone water disaster grouting treatment effect multidimensional detection and quantitative evaluation method, comprising: constructing the three-dimensional hydrogeological model of fault fracture zone containing water-rich core area, water channel, water pressure distribution, form the three-dimensional monitoring network covering fault fracture zone water disaster risk area;In the corresponding point monitoring of measuring point obtains basic parameter;Using extreme value standardization method, the basic parameter is normalized, and the parameter index weight is calculated by coupling improved analytic hierarchy process and water physical parameter sensitivity analysis method;The water efficiency index, grouting body-rock mass collaborative integrity index and water stability safety index are obtained by calculating the normalized water, physical, mechanical parameters;The effect grade is calculated using the comprehensive index formula of spatial risk correction, for determining the treatment effect.The application sets up evaluation standard strictly to high-risk area, to solve the problem that traditional uniform threshold cannot adapt to differentiated risk scenarios.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of underground construction data processing technology, specifically to a multi-dimensional detection and quantitative evaluation method for the grouting treatment effect of water damage in fault fracture zones of underground engineering. Background Technology

[0002] When underground engineering projects (tunnels, roadways, etc.) pass through fault fracture zones, water-rich fractured rock masses are prone to forming water-conducting channels, causing water hazards such as sudden water inrush and mudslides, which seriously threaten the safety of construction personnel and cause significant economic losses. Grouting technology, because it can simultaneously achieve "water blocking" and "reinforcement", often becomes the core and preferred technology for the treatment of such water hazards. The effect of grouting treatment directly affects the success or failure of water hazard prevention and control. Therefore, it is crucial to carry out scientific detection and evaluation to verify multiple requirements such as "water blocking meeting standards", "rock mass reinforcement" and "long-term stability", and to provide a basis for subsequent engineering decisions.

[0003] Currently, the detection technologies after grouting treatment for fault water damage in underground engineering (tunnels, roadways, etc.) mainly include four categories:

[0004] First, the core drilling method can directly observe the density of the grout, but it is a point-based test with poor representativeness. In addition, drilling will damage the grout curtain and may induce new seepage channels, so it cannot reflect the overall water blocking effect.

[0005] Second, geophysical methods (such as ground-penetrating radar and acoustic testing) are used. Ground-penetrating radar is easily affected by the water content of the rock mass and metal components, and has low accuracy in identifying water plugging in deep small fissures. Acoustic testing can only reflect the integrity of the rock mass and is difficult to quantify core hydrodynamic parameters such as water inflow and water pressure, and cannot be directly correlated with water plugging efficiency.

[0006] Thirdly, there are water parameters testing methods (such as water pressure test and water inflow monitoring). Water pressure test is a local destructive test with a limited testing range, which is difficult to cover the entire treatment area. Water inflow monitoring can only reflect the macroscopic water blocking effect and cannot locate local leakage points and weak grouting areas.

[0007] Fourth, mechanical parameter testing methods (such as strain monitoring and strength testing) focus on the short-term mechanical response of rock masses, neglecting the stability decay under long-term water pressure, and cannot synchronously correlate with water blocking effects, making it difficult to meet the dual evaluation requirements of "water blocking" and "stability".

[0008] Furthermore, these technologies and their corresponding evaluation methods generally have shortcomings:

[0009] 1) Focusing on mechanical indicators such as rock mass strength while neglecting core hydrodynamic parameters such as water inflow and water pressure, the treatment may fail, resulting in a situation where "the grouting is dense but water still seeps in".

[0010] 2) The indicators are too simplistic and rely on a single detection technology, which is not representative enough or easily interfered with, and cannot reflect the synergistic effect of water blocking and rock mass integrity.

[0011] 3) Insufficient quantification: There is a lack of quantitative evaluation methods, and the evaluation results rely on experience-based judgment, making it difficult to guide the optimization of grouting schemes.

[0012] In summary, existing methods mostly rely on single geophysical exploration or core drilling, which are not suitable for the dynamic situation of water-rock synergy in water-rich faults. They suffer from problems such as one-sided evaluation of single indicators, reliance on experience for weighting, failure to consider risk differences, and poor coordination between "detection-evaluation-treatment". This leads to inaccurate judgment of treatment effects, improper assessment of risk areas, and a lack of specificity and scientific basis for grouting schemes.

[0013] Therefore, this application proposes a multi-dimensional detection and quantitative evaluation method for the treatment effect of grouting for water damage in fault fracture zones, which can improve the comprehensiveness, quantification and engineering adaptability of the evaluation, so as to solve the above-mentioned technical problems. Summary of the Invention

[0014] The main objective of this invention is to address the complex conditions of water-rich, high-pressure, and fracture-developed fault fracture zones in underground engineering projects (tunnels, roadways, etc.), as well as the core pain point of insufficient detection and evaluation of existing grouting treatment effects. By deeply integrating multi-source hydrophysical and mechanical parameters, supporting quantitative formulas, and comprehensively detecting and evaluating water-blocking efficiency and rock mass stability, this invention provides a multi-dimensional detection and quantitative evaluation method for grouting treatment effects in fault fracture zones. This method can ensure accurate determination of grouting treatment effects and supplementary grouting schemes, thereby solving the technical problems mentioned in the background art.

[0015] The present invention solves the above-mentioned technical problems by adopting the following technical solutions:

[0016] A multi-dimensional detection and quantitative evaluation method for grouting treatment of water hazards in fault fracture zones is proposed. This method employs a five-layer technical system: precise risk zone point selection → multi-source parameter acquisition → coupled weight calculation → core indicator quantification → risk adaptation evaluation. It integrates multi-source data from hydrology, physics, and mechanics to achieve a comprehensive quantitative evaluation of water-blocking efficiency, rock mass integrity, and structural stability. This provides crucial information for grouting quality control, grouting supplementation scheme optimization, and underground engineering safety management. Specifically, the following steps are executed using computer equipment:

[0017] Step S1. Construct a three-dimensional hydrogeological model of the fault fracture zone containing a water-rich core area, water-conducting channels, and water pressure distribution. In the model's location area, set up measuring points according to the principle of "densified measurement in the water-rich core area and gradient distribution in the transition zone." The water-rich core area (water inflow ≥ 5m³ / h) is defined as follows: 3 / h (m or water pressure ≥ 1MPa) Measuring point spacing ≤ 1m, transition zone (water inflow 1-5m³ / h) 3 / h (with water pressure of 0.5-1MPa) and spacing of 1-3m, forming a three-dimensional monitoring network covering the water hazard risk area of ​​the fault fracture zone;

[0018] Step S2. At the actual points corresponding to the model measuring points, the difference in water head before and after grouting is obtained by borehole water level monitoring, the permeability coefficient is obtained by water pressure test, the filling rate of grouting body is detected by ground radar (500-800MHz antenna), the longitudinal wave velocity of rock mass is obtained by cross-hole acoustic wave test, and the rock mass strain is monitored by distributed optical fiber, forming 10 basic parameters in 5 categories.

[0019] Step S3. The basic parameters are normalized to the [0,1] interval using the extreme value standardization method, and the corresponding index weights of the basic parameters are calculated by coupling the improved analytic hierarchy process (AHP) with the hydrological parameter sensitivity analysis method. The coupling formula is as follows:

[0020]

[0021] In the formula, For the first The overall weight of each indicator To incorporate subjective weighting in the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), a judgment matrix is ​​constructed by having experts score the "importance of water hazard control" to calculate the weights of water-blocking related indicators. For the sensitivity weights of hydrological parameters, Weighting adjustment coefficient ( (Take the larger value in the water-rich section).

[0022] Step S4. Calculate the water-blocking efficiency index using standardized hydrological, physical, and mechanical parameters. Grouting-Rock Mass Synergistic Integrity Index and water stability safety index ;

[0023] Step S5. Based on , , The effect level is calculated using a comprehensive index formula with spatial risk correction, which is used to determine the effect of grouting treatment for water damage in fault fracture zones and to provide treatment recommendations.

[0024] Preferably, the three-dimensional hydrogeological model is constructed based on advanced geological forecast data in step S1, which incorporates horizontal hydrological borehole inflow or water pressure tests to determine the water-rich core area, transition zone and water-conducting channel orientation in the model.

[0025] The source of the advanced geological prediction data is set as at least one of the following methods: seismic wave detection, ground-penetrating radar, infrared water detection, and horizontal borehole detection. The horizontal borehole data can be used to obtain fault data in advance, determine the fault location, determine the preliminary range (e.g., 10m fracture zone), and re-drill horizontal boreholes within this range to test the water inflow and water pressure at each mileage, and finally determine the specific water-rich core area.

[0026] The water-rich core area is set with a water inflow rate ≥ a preset value A (generally 5m). 3 / h The area is defined as a region with a water pressure ≥ the preset value B (generally 1MPa) or a region within the range of 1 times the fault fracture zone and the grouting influence radius;

[0027] A set of preset inflow rate limits A' and water pressure limits B' are defined, and the transition zone is set with the inflow rate within the preset range A' to A (generally 1 to 5 m). 3 / h The area is within the preset range of B' to B (generally 0.5 to 1 MPa) and the water pressure is within the range of 1 to 3 times the grouting influence radius.

[0028] Preferably, the three-dimensional monitoring network for the water hazard risk zone of the fault fracture zone in step S1 includes multiple measuring points located at grouting holes and in-tunnel detection holes, used to simultaneously collect hydrological, physical, and mechanical parameters, wherein:

[0029] Within the water-rich core area, a grid is used to deploy radial points with a spacing of ≤1m, focusing on covering densely water-conducting fracture zones, and the boreholes are arranged in a quincunx pattern.

[0030] Within the transition zone, monitoring points are arranged in a gradient according to water pressure and inflow rate, with a spacing of 1-3m. At least one set of ring monitoring points is set for every 0.2MPa water pressure, ultimately forming a three-dimensional monitoring network for the grouting body and surrounding rock mass.

[0031] Preferably, the basic parameters in step S2 include hydrological parameters, physical parameters, and mechanical parameters, and are acquired through a three-dimensional monitoring network, wherein:

[0032] The hydrological parameters include the inflow rate. Permeability coefficient and head difference The water inflow rate in the aforementioned hydrological parameters The weir measurement method was used to monitor and obtain the water inflow per unit length before and after grouting. , It is used to directly reflect the degree of water damage; the smaller the inflow, the more significant the water-blocking effect, with an accuracy of ≤0.1m. 3 / h m, the permeability coefficient before and after grouting The pressure before and after the test was calculated by performing a three-stage water pressure test (0.3MPa, 0.6MPa, and 1.0MPa) in a borehole. , The coefficient is used to directly reflect the permeability of the rock mass. The smaller the coefficient, the better the impermeability of the rock mass. The test pressure is 80% of the grouting pressure (maximum not exceeding 1 MPa). The water head difference is mentioned. A water level gauge with a specified accuracy of ≤0.01m was used to monitor the change in borehole water level before and after grouting, and the head difference before and after grouting was calculated. , The difference is used to directly reflect the water pressure control effect. The larger the difference, the stronger the ability of the grouting body to block groundwater seepage.

[0033] The physical parameters include the grout filling rate. Longitudinal wave velocity And the degree of crack closure, the filling rate of the grouting body A 500-800MHz high-frequency ground-penetrating radar was used to calculate the difference in electromagnetic wave reflection between the grouting body and the rock mass. The resolution is ≤3cm, reflecting the degree of fracture sealing. A higher filling rate indicates more thorough sealing of the water-conducting channel. The longitudinal wave velocity... Single-hole or multi-hole acoustic wave detection is employed, specifically including longitudinal wave velocities before and after grouting. , Its test error is ≤5%, which is used to reflect the cementation strength of the rock mass. The higher the wave velocity, the stronger the integrity and bearing capacity of the rock mass. The fissure closure degree is calculated by inverting the fissure closure degree based on the correlation model between wave velocity and fissure density. It is used to reflect the fissure sealing effect of the rock mass. The higher the closure degree, the fewer the leakage paths.

[0034] The mechanical parameters include rock mass strain and compressive strength. The rock mass strain is monitored by distributed optical fiber to detect the maximum strain of the rock mass after grouting. And calculate the strain rate, with a monitoring accuracy of ≤1με, where the maximum strain of the rock mass The strain rate is used to reflect the degree of rock mass deformation. The smaller the strain, the more stable the rock mass, thus avoiding the formation of new water-conducting channels due to excessive deformation. The strain rate is used to reflect the development trend of rock mass deformation. The smaller the rate, the gentler the rock mass deformation, and the more guaranteed the long-term stability. The compressive strength is calculated by core drilling and testing the uniaxial compressive strength of the rock mass and the grout. It is used as a supplementary parameter for stability evaluation. The uniaxial compressive strength of the rock mass reflects the rock mass's own bearing capacity. The higher the strength, the better the stability. The uniaxial compressive strength of the grout reflects the reinforcement effect of the grout. The higher the strength, the stronger the cementing and supporting effect on the fractured rock mass.

[0035] Preferably, before performing the index weight coupling calculation in step S3, the hydrological parameters, physical parameters, and mechanical parameters are standardized according to the specified index type to normalize them to the [0,1] interval, thereby eliminating the differences in dimensions and numerical ranges of the hydrological parameters, physical parameters, and mechanical parameters, making each index uniform and comparable, so as to facilitate weighted calculation and comprehensive evaluation.

[0036] Based on the correlation between parameter values ​​and evaluation objectives (such as water-blocking effect, rock mass stability, and grouting integrity), the hydrological parameters, physical parameters, and mechanical parameters are divided into superior-effect indicators and control-effect indicators. The larger the value of the superior-effect indicator, the better the achievement of core objectives such as grouting water blocking, reinforcement, and stabilization, and it is positively correlated with the treatment effect. Specifically, this includes the difference in water head after grouting. Grouting filling rate Longitudinal wave velocity after grouting The smaller the values ​​of the suppression and control indicators, such as fracture closure degree, rock mass compressive strength, and grout compressive strength, the better the suppression effect on disaster risk. These indicators are negatively correlated with the treatment effect and specifically include the water inflow after grouting. Permeability coefficient after grouting Maximum strain of rock mass after grouting and strain rate after grouting;

[0037] The superiority-type indicators and the suppression-type indicators are standardized as follows:

[0038]

[0039] in, This is the original data. , These represent the maximum and minimum values ​​of the indicator, respectively.

[0040] Preferably, in step S3, the sensitivity weights of the hydrophysical parameters are... The larger the value, the more it ensures the dominant role of hydrological parameters. In this case, the calculation formula is:

[0041]

[0042]

[0043] therefore:

[0044]

[0045] in, For the first The sensitivity coefficient of this indicator to the permeability coefficient. This represents the change in the permeability coefficient. This represents the change in the indicator.

[0046] Preferably, in step S4, a water-blocking efficiency index is established to comprehensively quantify the effect of grouting on water damage control. Grouting-Rock Mass Synergistic Integrity Index And the water stability safety index that considers the coordinated safety of water pressure and rock mass deformation ,in:

[0047] To comprehensively quantify the effectiveness of grouting in controlling water hazards, this study integrates two core water-blocking indicators: "reduction in water inflow" and "reduction in permeability coefficient" (the former directly reflects the degree of water hazard mitigation, while the latter reflects the improvement in the rock mass's impermeability). Based on this, a water-blocking efficiency index is established. The mathematical expression for its establishment is:

[0048]

[0049] In the formula, The weight of the inflow rate attenuation term, As for the weighting of the permeability reduction term, the inflow rate in engineering projects is the core indicator that directly measures whether water damage has been mitigated, and its priority is higher than that of the permeability coefficient. The reasonable range is (For example, the upper limit can be used for soft rock water-rich strata, and the lower limit can be used for hard rock fissure water strata.) , These represent the water inflow per unit length before and after grouting. , These are the permeability coefficients before and after grouting;

[0050] To comprehensively reflect the synergistic effect of the rock mass's self-cementing strengthening and fracture sealing after grouting (both of which jointly determine rock mass integrity and are indispensable), a grout-rock mass synergistic integrity index was established by integrating acoustic wave velocity and grout filling rate. There exists a mathematical expression that can be established as:

[0051]

[0052] In the formula, As the weight of the longitudinal wave velocity rise rate, As the weighting factor for the grout filling rate, the longitudinal wave velocity increase rate directly reflects the improvement in the overall mechanical properties of the rock mass after grouting and cementation, while the grout filling rate reflects the degree of fracture sealing. Together, they reflect the overall integrity of the rock mass. The reasonable range is (If the fracture zone is mainly filled with fissures, the lower limit can be used; if it is mainly cemented rock mass, the upper limit can be used.) , These represent the longitudinal wave velocities of the rock mass before and after grouting. The grout volume filling rate obtained through ground-penetrating radar inversion;

[0053] To comprehensively evaluate both "water pressure control effectiveness" and "rock mass deformation stability" (both jointly determine water stability safety, but excessive rock mass deformation can easily induce new water-conducting channels, posing a higher risk), a water stability safety index considering the synergistic safety of water pressure and rock mass deformation is established. There exists a mathematical expression that can be established as:

[0054]

[0055] In the formula, The weights of the head difference ratio, The weight of the rock mass strain safety term is given here because excessive rock mass strain can easily induce new water-conducting channels. Therefore, whether the rock mass strain exceeds the limit value directly affects structural stability and has a higher priority than the head difference. The reasonable range is (For example, the lower limit can be used for high-stress strata, and the upper limit can be used for low-stress strata.) , These represent the difference in water head before and after grouting. This represents the maximum strain of the rock mass after grouting. The allowable ultimate strain of the rock mass is determined by taking values ​​according to lithology (e.g., 300–500 με for soft rock and 100–200 με for hard rock) to ensure compatibility with different geological conditions.

[0056] Preferably, the specific calculation process for calculating the effect level using the comprehensive index formula for spatial risk correction in step S5 includes:

[0057] Considering the significant differences in initial water hazard risk (determined by both water pressure and inflow rate) at different detection points, areas with high water pressure and high inflow rate require stricter requirements for the water-blocking effect and reinforcement strength of grouting treatment. Using a uniform evaluation standard could easily lead to overly lenient assessment of high-risk areas (creating safety hazards) or overly strict assessment of low-risk areas (increasing unnecessary costs). Based on the coupled risk assessment logic of water pressure and inflow rate, a water hazard risk correction coefficient is established to strengthen the evaluation weight of high-risk areas for each detection point. Water hazard risk correction coefficient The calculation formula is:

[0058]

[0059] In the formula, This is the risk balancing coefficient, empirically taken as 0.2 to 0.4. For detection points The initial water pressure, This represents the water inflow per unit length before grouting. The maximum initial water pressure in the region. This represents the maximum initial inflow rate in the area.

[0060] This method can strengthen the evaluation weight of high-risk areas by coupling the initial water pressure and the inflow rate, making the evaluation results more consistent with the actual risk scenario. Furthermore, the correction coefficient for high water pressure and high inflow areas is larger, and the evaluation criteria are more stringent.

[0061] At this stage, since water blocking is the primary task (with the highest weight) in water hazard management, rock mass reinforcement is the foundation for long-term stability, and structural stability is the guarantee against secondary disasters, in order to align with the logical hierarchy of grouting treatment—"water blocking as the core, reinforcement as the foundation, and stability as the guarantee"—and to adapt to the differences in water hazard risks in different regions, based on the water hazard risk correction coefficient, multi-dimensional indicators are integrated to form a unified decision-making basis, and a comprehensive effect index is established. for:

[0062]

[0063] In the formula, For the first The comprehensive weight of each core evaluation indicator is used to reflect the importance of each indicator to the governance effect. , , The water blocking efficiency index is as follows: Weights, Grout-Rock Mass Synergistic Integrity Index Weights and water stability safety index The weight, For the first One core evaluation indicator, , , Equivalently represented as the water-blocking efficiency index Grouting-Rock Mass Synergistic Integrity Index Water stability safety index .

[0064] Preferably, the specific criteria for determining the effectiveness of grouting treatment for water damage in the fault fracture zone in step S5 are as follows:

[0065] Based on the established comprehensive effect index In line with the core principle of "layered treatment and risk-appropriate" in grouting treatment projects for water-rich fault fracture zones, and matching the actual engineering needs of gradually increasing the treatment intensity from no risk to high risk, the grouting treatment effect of water hazards in fault fracture zones is divided into four levels: excellent, good, qualified, and unqualified.

[0066] like If the result is satisfactory, it indicates that the water blocking is sufficient, the rock mass is intact, and the stability is good, so no additional grouting is required, and the effect is judged to be of excellent level.

[0067] like If the result is negative, it indicates that the local hydrological parameters are slightly worse and monitoring needs to be strengthened. The effect should be judged as good.

[0068] like In this case, targeted grouting is recommended (e.g., For lower levels, strengthen water-blocking grouting. If the effect is too low, the rock mass reinforcement should be strengthened, and the effect should be judged as qualified.

[0069] like If the grouting plan is not satisfactory, it is recommended to revise the grouting plan (increase grouting pressure, increase the density of grouting holes, and optimize grout mix ratio), and determine its effect as unqualified.

[0070] In another aspect, the present invention also discloses a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, causes the processor to perform the steps of the method described above.

[0071] In another aspect, the present invention also discloses a computer device, including a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores a computer program, and when the computer program is executed by the processor, the processor performs the steps of the method described above.

[0072] As can be seen from the above technical solution, the present invention provides a multi-dimensional detection and quantitative evaluation method for the grouting treatment effect of water damage in fault fracture zones. Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following advantages:

[0073] 1. This invention uses multidimensional detection to collect parameters in all dimensions of water mechanics, physical mechanics, and mechanical mechanics, and performs corresponding quantitative evaluations of water blocking, reinforcement, and stabilization. It combines risk correction coefficients to solve the problem of differentiated weighting in high-risk areas, thereby filling the gap in the existing technology for a multidimensional quantitative evaluation system of grouting treatment effect under complex water-rich fault conditions.

[0074] 2. This invention integrates multiple parameters from three categories: hydrology, physics, and mechanics, and deploys a detection network with densification in the water-rich core area and gradient in the transition area. It can comprehensively reflect the effects of grouting, water blocking, reinforcement, and stabilization of fault fracture zones caused by water damage, and takes into account both detection accuracy and efficiency during data analysis.

[0075] 3. By introducing a water hazard risk correction coefficient and combining it with the coupling calculation of initial water pressure and inflow, this invention can set strict evaluation standards for high-risk areas, thereby solving the problem that traditional uniform thresholds cannot adapt to differentiated risk scenarios and reducing the probability of missed detection of major disasters.

[0076] It should be understood that the descriptions in this section are not intended to identify key or essential features of embodiments of the invention, nor are they intended to limit the scope of the invention. Other features of the invention will become readily apparent from the following description. Of course, implementing any product of the invention does not necessarily require achieving all of the advantages described above simultaneously. Attached Figure Description

[0077] The accompanying drawings, which form part of this application, are used to provide a further understanding of the invention. The illustrative embodiments of the invention and their descriptions are used to explain the invention and do not constitute an undue limitation of the invention. In the drawings:

[0078] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the overall evaluation process of the present invention;

[0079] Figure 2 This is a top view schematic diagram of the axial fault fracture zone partitioning in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0080] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the tunnel axial drilling arrangement in an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0081] The technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only a part of the embodiments of the present invention, and not all of them. Unless otherwise specified, the embodiments and features in the embodiments of this application can be combined with each other. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0082] For details in the embodiments, please refer to Figures 1 to 3 .

[0083] like Figure 1 As shown in the embodiments of the present invention, the method for multi-dimensional detection and quantitative evaluation of the grouting treatment effect of water damage in fault fracture zones includes:

[0084] Step S1. Based on advanced geological prediction data, a three-dimensional hydrogeological model of the fault fracture zone, including a water-rich core area, water-conducting channels, and water pressure distribution, is initially constructed. This model incorporates horizontal hydrological borehole inflow or water pressure tests to determine the direction of the water-rich core area, transition zone, and water-conducting channels within the model. Subsequently, measuring points are deployed in the geological area of ​​the model according to the principle of "densified density in the water-rich core area and gradient distribution in the transition zone." The water-rich core area (inflow ≥ 5 m³ / h) is further defined as follows: 3 / h (m or water pressure ≥ 1MPa) Measuring point spacing ≤ 1m, transition zone (water inflow 1-5m³ / h) 3 / h A three-dimensional monitoring network covering the fault fracture zone water hazard risk area is formed by spacing the points 1-3m apart (with water pressure of 0.5-1MPa). This three-dimensional monitoring network includes multiple measuring points located at grouting holes and tunnel exploration holes, which are used to simultaneously collect hydrological, physical, and mechanical parameters.

[0085] The sources of advanced geological prediction data are set as at least one of the following: seismic wave detection, ground-penetrating radar, infrared water detection, and horizontal borehole method. Among them, the horizontal borehole data can be used to obtain fault data in advance, determine the fault location and determine the preliminary range (e.g., 10m fracture zone), and then drill horizontal boreholes again within this range to test the water inflow and water pressure at each mileage, and finally determine the specific water-rich core area.

[0086] In a further embodiment, the water-rich core area can be set to have a water inflow of ≥5m³. 3 / h Areas with a water pressure of ≥1MPa or m can also be defined as fault fracture zones and within a radius of 1 times the grouting influence radius. During the three-dimensional monitoring network detection process, a grid can be used to deploy radial points in the water-rich core area, with a point spacing of ≤1m, focusing on covering densely water-conducting fracture zones, and the boreholes are arranged in a quincunx pattern.

[0087] In a further embodiment, the transition zone can be configured with a water inflow rate of 1-5 m³ / h. 3 / h The area with water pressure of 0.5-1MPa can also be determined according to the range of 1-3 times the grouting influence radius. During the detection process of the three-dimensional monitoring network, the points can be arranged in a gradient according to water pressure and water inflow in the transition zone, with the point spacing set at 1-3m. At least one set of ring monitoring points is set for every 0.2MPa water pressure, and finally a three-dimensional monitoring network for the grouting body and the surrounding rock mass is formed.

[0088] Step S2. At the actual points corresponding to the model measuring points, the difference in water head before and after grouting is obtained by borehole water level monitoring, the permeability coefficient is obtained by water pressure test, the filling rate of the grouting body is detected by ground-penetrating radar (500-800MHz antenna), the longitudinal wave velocity of the rock mass is obtained by cross-hole acoustic wave test, and the rock mass strain is monitored by distributed optical fiber, forming 10 basic parameters in 5 categories. These parameters can be distinguished as hydrological parameters, physical parameters and mechanical parameters, and all of them can be acquired by three-dimensional monitoring network.

[0089] in:

[0090] (1) Hydrological parameters include inflow rate Permeability coefficient and head difference

[0091] Inflow rate in hydraulic parameters The weir measurement method was used to monitor and obtain the water inflow per unit length before and after grouting. , It is used to directly reflect the degree of water damage; the smaller the inflow, the more significant the water-blocking effect, with an accuracy of ≤0.1m. 3 / h m;

[0092] Permeability coefficient The permeability coefficient before and after grouting was calculated by drilling three-stage water pressure tests (0.3MPa, 0.6MPa, and 1.0MPa). , The coefficient is used to directly reflect the permeability of the rock mass. The smaller the coefficient, the better the impermeability of the rock mass. The test pressure is 80% of the grouting pressure (maximum not exceeding 1 MPa).

[0093] head difference A water level gauge with a specified accuracy of ≤0.01m was used to monitor the change in borehole water level before and after grouting, and the head difference before and after grouting was calculated. , This value directly reflects the effectiveness of water pressure control; the larger the difference, the stronger the ability of the grouting body to block groundwater seepage.

[0094] (2) Physical parameters include grout filling rate Longitudinal wave velocity and fracture closure

[0095] Grouting filling rate The 500-800MHz high-frequency ground-penetrating radar is used to calculate the difference in electromagnetic wave reflection between the grouting body and the rock mass. Its resolution is ≤3cm. It is used to reflect the degree of crack sealing. The higher the filling rate, the more thorough the sealing of the water-conducting channel.

[0096] Longitudinal wave velocity Single-hole or multi-hole acoustic wave detection is employed, specifically including longitudinal wave velocities before and after grouting. , Its test error is ≤5%, which is used to calculate the wave velocity rise rate and to reflect the rock mass cementation strength. The higher the wave velocity, the stronger the rock mass integrity and bearing capacity.

[0097] The degree of fracture closure is calculated by inverting the fracture closure degree based on the correlation model between wave velocity and fracture density. It is used to reflect the effect of rock mass fracture sealing. The higher the degree of closure, the fewer the leakage paths.

[0098] (3) Mechanical parameters include rock mass strain and compressive strength

[0099] Rock mass strain was monitored by distributed optical fiber to detect the maximum strain of the rock mass after grouting. The strain rate was calculated, and its monitoring accuracy is ≤1με, where the maximum strain of the rock mass is... The strain rate is used to reflect the degree of rock mass deformation. The smaller the strain, the more stable the rock mass, thus avoiding the formation of new water-conducting channels due to excessive deformation. The strain rate is used to reflect the development trend of rock mass deformation. The smaller the rate, the gentler the rock mass deformation, and the more guaranteed the long-term stability.

[0100] The compressive strength is calculated by core drilling and testing the uniaxial compressive strength of the rock mass and the grout, and is used as a supplementary parameter for stability evaluation. The uniaxial compressive strength of the rock mass reflects its own bearing capacity; the higher the strength, the better the stability. The uniaxial compressive strength of the grout reflects the reinforcement effect of the grout; the higher the strength, the stronger the cementing and supporting effect on the fractured rock mass.

[0101] By integrating multiple parameters from three categories—hydrological, physical, and mechanical—and deploying a detection network with densification in the water-rich core area and gradient deployment in the transition zone, this method can comprehensively reflect the effects of grouting, water plugging, reinforcement, and stabilization of water-damaged fault fracture zones, while also considering both detection accuracy and efficiency during data analysis.

[0102] Step S3. The extreme value standardization method is used to normalize the basic parameters, including hydrological parameters, physical parameters, and mechanical parameters, to the [0,1] interval. This eliminates the differences in dimensions and numerical ranges of hydrological, physical, and mechanical parameters, making each indicator uniform and comparable for weighted calculation and comprehensive evaluation. The standardization process is as follows:

[0103] Based on the correlation between parameter values ​​and evaluation objectives (such as water-blocking effect, rock mass stability, and grouting integrity), hydrological, physical, and mechanical parameters are categorized into superior-effect indicators and control-effect indicators. Higher values ​​for superior-effect indicators indicate better achievement of core objectives such as grouting water blocking, reinforcement, and stabilization, and are positively correlated with treatment effectiveness. Specifically, this includes the difference in water head after grouting. Grouting filling rate Longitudinal wave velocity after grouting The smaller the values ​​of the control-type indicators, such as fracture closure degree, rock mass compressive strength, and grout compressive strength, the better the suppression effect on disaster risk. These values ​​are negatively correlated with the treatment effect. Specifically, the values ​​include the water inflow after grouting. Permeability coefficient after grouting Maximum strain of rock mass after grouting and strain rate after grouting;

[0104] At this point, the performance-enhancing and control-indicating indicators are standardized as follows:

[0105]

[0106] in, This is the original data. , These are the maximum and minimum values ​​of the indicator, respectively.

[0107] Subsequently, by coupling the improved Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) with the hydrological parameter sensitivity analysis method, the corresponding index weights of the basic parameters are calculated, and the coupling formula is as follows:

[0108]

[0109] In the formula, For the first The overall weight of each indicator To incorporate subjective weighting in the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), a judgment matrix is ​​constructed by having experts score the "importance of water hazard control" to calculate the weights of water-blocking related indicators. For the sensitivity weights of hydrological parameters, Weighting adjustment coefficient ( (Take the larger value in the water-rich section).

[0110] Sensitivity weights of hydrological parameters here The larger the value, the more it ensures the dominant role of hydrological parameters. The specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0111]

[0112] In the formula, For the first The sensitivity coefficient of this indicator to the permeability coefficient. This represents the change in the permeability coefficient. This represents the change in the indicator.

[0113] Step S4. Using standardized hydrological, physical, and mechanical parameters, establish water-blocking efficiency indices to comprehensively quantify the effectiveness of grouting in controlling water damage. Grouting-Rock Mass Synergistic Integrity Index And the water stability safety index that considers the coordinated safety of water pressure and rock mass deformation ,in:

[0114] To comprehensively quantify the effectiveness of grouting in controlling water hazards, this study integrates two core water-blocking indicators: "reduction in water inflow" and "reduction in permeability coefficient" (the former directly reflects the degree of water hazard mitigation, while the latter reflects the improvement in the rock mass's impermeability). Based on this, a water-blocking efficiency index is established. The mathematical expression for its establishment is:

[0115]

[0116] In the formula, The weight of the inflow rate attenuation term, As for the weighting of the permeability reduction term, the inflow rate in engineering projects is the core indicator that directly measures whether water damage has been mitigated, and its priority is higher than that of the permeability coefficient. The reasonable range is (For example, the upper limit can be used for soft rock water-rich strata, and the lower limit can be used for hard rock fissure water strata.) , These represent the water inflow per unit length before and after grouting. , These are the permeability coefficients before and after grouting;

[0117] To comprehensively reflect the synergistic effect of the rock mass's self-cementing strengthening and fracture sealing after grouting (both of which jointly determine rock mass integrity and are indispensable), a grout-rock mass synergistic integrity index was established by integrating acoustic wave velocity and grout filling rate. There exists a mathematical expression that can be established as:

[0118]

[0119] In the formula, As the weight of the longitudinal wave velocity rise rate, As the weighting factor for the grout filling rate, the longitudinal wave velocity increase rate directly reflects the improvement in the overall mechanical properties of the rock mass after grouting and cementation, while the grout filling rate reflects the degree of fracture sealing. Together, they reflect the overall integrity of the rock mass. The reasonable range is (If the fracture zone is mainly filled with fissures, the lower limit can be used; if it is mainly cemented rock mass, the upper limit can be used.) , These represent the longitudinal wave velocities of the rock mass before and after grouting. The grout volume filling rate obtained through ground-penetrating radar inversion;

[0120] To comprehensively evaluate both "water pressure control effectiveness" and "rock mass deformation stability" (both jointly determine water stability safety, but excessive rock mass deformation can easily induce new water-conducting channels, posing a higher risk), a water stability safety index considering the synergistic safety of water pressure and rock mass deformation is established. There exists a mathematical expression that can be established as:

[0121]

[0122] In the formula, The weights of the head difference ratio, The weight of the rock mass strain safety term is given here because excessive rock mass strain can easily induce new water-conducting channels. Therefore, whether the rock mass strain exceeds the limit value directly affects structural stability and has a higher priority than the head difference. The reasonable range is (For example, the lower limit can be used for high-stress strata, and the upper limit can be used for low-stress strata.) , These represent the difference in water head before and after grouting. This represents the maximum strain of the rock mass after grouting. The allowable ultimate strain of the rock mass is determined by taking values ​​according to lithology (e.g., 300–500 με for soft rock and 100–200 με for hard rock) to ensure compatibility with different geological conditions.

[0123] Step S5. Based on , , The effect level is calculated using a comprehensive index formula with spatial risk correction. The specific calculation process includes:

[0124] Considering the significant differences in initial water hazard risk (determined by both water pressure and inflow rate) at different detection points, areas with high water pressure and high inflow rate require stricter requirements for the water-blocking effect and reinforcement strength of grouting treatment. Using a uniform evaluation standard could easily lead to overly lenient assessment of high-risk areas (creating safety hazards) or overly strict assessment of low-risk areas (increasing unnecessary costs). Based on the coupled risk assessment logic of water pressure and inflow rate, a water hazard risk correction coefficient is established to strengthen the evaluation weight of high-risk areas for each detection point. Water hazard risk correction coefficient The calculation formula is:

[0125]

[0126] In the formula, This is the risk balancing coefficient, empirically taken as 0.2 to 0.4. For detection points The initial water pressure, This represents the water inflow per unit length before grouting. The maximum initial water pressure in the region. This represents the maximum initial inflow rate in the area.

[0127] This method can strengthen the evaluation weight of high-risk areas by coupling the initial water pressure and the inflow rate, making the evaluation results more consistent with the actual risk scenario. Furthermore, the correction coefficient for high water pressure and high inflow areas is larger, and the evaluation criteria are more stringent.

[0128] At this stage, since water blocking is the primary task (with the highest weight) in water hazard management, rock mass reinforcement is the foundation for long-term stability, and structural stability is the guarantee against secondary disasters, in order to align with the logical hierarchy of grouting treatment—"water blocking as the core, reinforcement as the foundation, and stability as the guarantee"—and to adapt to the differences in water hazard risks in different regions, based on the water hazard risk correction coefficient, multi-dimensional indicators are integrated to form a unified decision-making basis, and a comprehensive effect index is established. for:

[0129]

[0130] In the formula, For the first The comprehensive weight of each core evaluation indicator is used to reflect the importance of each indicator to the governance effect. , , The water blocking efficiency index is as follows: Weights, Grout-Rock Mass Synergistic Integrity Index Weights and water stability safety index The weight, For the first One core evaluation indicator, , , Equivalently represented as the water-blocking efficiency index Grouting-Rock Mass Synergistic Integrity Index Water stability safety index ;

[0131] At this point, by introducing a water hazard risk correction coefficient and combining it with the initial water pressure and inflow rate, we can set stricter evaluation standards for high-risk areas to solve the problem that traditional uniform thresholds cannot be adapted to differentiated risk scenarios, thereby reducing the probability of missed judgments of major disasters.

[0132] Subsequently, the effectiveness of grouting treatment for water damage in fault fracture zones was determined based on the effect level, and treatment recommendations were given. The specific determination criteria are as follows:

[0133] Based on the established comprehensive effect index In line with the core principle of "layered treatment and risk-appropriate" in grouting treatment projects for water-rich fault fracture zones, and matching the actual engineering needs of gradually increasing the treatment intensity from no risk to high risk, the grouting treatment effect of water hazards in fault fracture zones is divided into four levels: excellent, good, qualified, and unqualified.

[0134] like If the effect is good, it is judged as excellent, indicating that the water blocking is sufficient, the rock mass is intact, the stability is good, and no additional grouting is required.

[0135] like If the effect is poor, it is judged as good, indicating that the local hydrological parameters are slightly worse and monitoring needs to be strengthened.

[0136] like If the effect is deemed satisfactory, targeted grouting is recommended (e.g., For lower levels, strengthen water-blocking grouting. (For low-lying areas, strengthen the rock mass reinforcement).

[0137] like If the effect is not satisfactory, it is recommended to revise the grouting plan (increase grouting pressure, increase the density of grouting holes, and optimize the grout mix ratio).

[0138] By dividing the comprehensive index into four levels, the corresponding measures for "no treatment required, monitoring only, local grouting, and redesigning the plan" can be clearly defined, so that the evaluation results can be directly matched with the construction decisions, avoiding the reliance on manual experience for maintenance plans and improving the targeting and efficiency of the treatment.

[0139] Furthermore, considering the significant impact of different physical parameters of the fault fracture zone on the accuracy of grouting treatment effect evaluation, a coupled correction term is introduced based on the dynamic correlation between the physical parameter M of the fault fracture zone and water hazard risk. This leads to the establishment of a comprehensive effect index formula that better suits complex geological conditions. This formula focuses on the core evaluation dimensions of "water blocking-reinforcement-stabilization-geological adaptation" while strengthening the adaptability of the evaluation system to actual geological conditions. The comprehensive effect index formula is as follows:

[0140]

[0141] In the formula, w1, w2, w3, and w4 are the weights of the water-blocking efficiency index W, the grout-rock mass synergistic integrity index I, the water stability safety index S, and the fault fracture zone mass parameter M, respectively (satisfying w1+w2+w3+w4=1); M is the fault fracture zone mass parameter, which is obtained by integrating the core mass characteristics for quantitative calculation (calculated by comprehensively considering rock mass particle size distribution, clay content, and porosity). ,in For characteristic particle size, Maximum particle size, n is porosity, ω is clay content, α, β, and γ are the weighting coefficients of the characteristic particle size ratio, porosity correction term, and clay content correction term, respectively, and the three satisfy α+β+γ=1). This is a quality-risk coupling correction coefficient, specifically used to quantify the amplification or attenuation effect of different quality fracture zones on water hazard risk. , As the baseline physical parameters, The coupling coefficient is defined by lithological classification: μ = 0.8 for hard rock fracture zones, μ = 1.2 for soft rock fracture zones, and μ = 1.0 for migmatite fracture zones. When M > When the crushed zone has better physical properties, reasonable particle size distribution, and high density, ≥1, moderately weaken the risk correction strength; when M< (When the fractured zone has poor physical properties, high clay content, and well-developed pores) <1. Further strengthen the risk correction intensity to achieve dynamic adaptation of "the worse the physical condition, the stricter the evaluation standard", and avoid the problem of lenient evaluation in high-risk areas due to ignoring physical differences.

[0142] Furthermore, considering the varying degrees of influence of different physical parameters of the fault fracture zone on each evaluation index, and taking into account the risk differences in different detection areas (core area / transition zone / buffer zone), in specific examples, an adaptive formula can be further established to dynamically adjust the weights according to the initial water hazard risk and physical deviation, replacing the traditional fixed weight model and improving the accuracy of the evaluation.

[0143]

[0144] In the formula, ξ is the dynamic adaptive weight of the i-th indicator (i=1~4, corresponding to the weights of W, I, S, and M respectively); ξ is the risk sensitivity coefficient (ξ=0.4 is recommended), used to amplify the weight of core prevention and control indicators (such as water blocking efficiency W, water stability safety S) in high-risk areas; ζ is the physical condition sensitivity coefficient (ζ=0.3 is recommended), used to amplify the weight of physical condition-related indicators (such as physical condition parameter M, grout-rock mass synergistic integrity I) in areas with poor physical condition. This formula dynamically adjusts the weight allocation through the dual dimensions of initial water hazard risk and physical condition deviation, so that the weight of key indicators in high-risk and poor physical condition areas is automatically increased, and the weight distribution in low-risk and good physical condition areas is more balanced. This effectively solves the pain point that fixed weights cannot adapt to differentiated geological and risk scenarios, and further improves the scientificity and engineering adaptability of the evaluation results.

[0145] In summary, this method uses multidimensional detection to collect parameters across all dimensions of hydrology, physics, and mechanics, and performs corresponding quantitative evaluations of water blocking, reinforcement, and stabilization. It also incorporates a risk correction coefficient to address the issue of differentiated weighting in high-risk areas. This fills the gap in existing technologies for a multidimensional quantitative evaluation system of grouting treatment effects under complex water-rich fault conditions. This method is of great significance for promoting the upgrading of underground engineering water hazard treatment effect assessment technology, improving the accuracy of risk prevention and control in fault fracture zones, and ensuring the safe and efficient conduct of tunnel / roadway construction.

[0146] Based on the above method, in practical engineering applications, in one embodiment, combined with Figure 2 , Figure 3 As shown, when underground engineering projects (tunnels, roadways, etc.) cross faults, the spatial relationship between the two directly determines the detection range, drilling angle, and risk level. Taking a mountain tunnel crossing a normal fault as an example, the section from tunnel mileage K1+150 to K1+300 crosses a normal fault (numbered F1). Before detection, the following core parameters need to be determined through advance survey: the angle between the fault strike and the tunnel axis, the fault dip angle, the thickness of the fault fracture zone, and the location of the fault on the tunnel cross-section.

[0147] The angle between the fault strike and the tunnel axis refers to the angle between the fault's extension direction and the tunnel's excavation direction. It is divided into three categories: orthogonal (angle 80°-90°), oblique (30°-80°), and parallel (<30°), which determines the longitudinal coverage length of the detection network (oblique / parallel faults require extended coverage). The fault dip angle is the angle between the fault and the horizontal plane (0°-90°), affecting the borehole dip direction (e.g., for a fault with a dip angle of 60°, the tunnel sidewall borehole needs to be inclined 30°-45° towards the fault to penetrate the fracture zone). The fault fracture zone thickness is the lateral width of the core fractured area of ​​the fault (usually 1-10m), and it is necessary to ensure that the detection borehole penetrates the full thickness of the fracture zone (borehole depth ≥ fracture zone thickness + 2m). The fault location in the tunnel cross-section refers to the part of the fault that crosses the tunnel (crown, arch waist, sidewall, floor). Faults in the crown / floor are prone to water inrush and collapse, so the number of measuring points needs to be increased. For sidewall faults, the lateral pressure effect of water pressure on the lining needs to be considered.

[0148] Advanced geological forecasting has confirmed that:

[0149] 1) The fault strikes N35°E, the tunnel axis is N70°E, the angle between the two is 35° (oblique fault), the fault dip angle is 68° (steep dip angle), and the fracture zone thickness is 8m;

[0150] 2) Fault spatial range: longitudinal (tunnel excavation direction) K1+195~K1+215 (20m), transversely crossing the tunnel arch to the bottom slab area;

[0151] 3) Based on the water inflow and water pressure test data of the previous horizontal boreholes, the three-dimensional hydrogeological model was constructed to determine the candidate section of the water-rich core area K1+200~K1+210 (10m), the transition zone K1+185~K1+200 (15m) and K1+210~K1+225 (15m), and the buffer zone 3m in each.

[0152] When the tunnel excavation reaches K1+182 (approximately 18m from the front end of the core area K1+200), the deployment will begin. First, the first set of boreholes will be constructed in the formed section that has been excavated up to K1+182 (the bottom of the borehole will cover the front buffer zone and the front end of the front transition zone, pointing towards K1+200). Subsequently, as the tunnel excavation progresses, the deployment will be completed in the entire range from K1+200 to K1+228.

[0153] The total coverage mileage is from K1+182 to K1+228 (total length 46m), which can be decomposed along the tunnel axis as follows:

[0154] 1) Front buffer zone: K1+182~K1+185 (3m);

[0155] 2) Front transition zone: K1+185~K1+200 (15m);

[0156] 3) Core area: K1+200~K1+210 (10m, meeting the requirement of water inflow ≥5m³ / h) m or water pressure ≥1MPa);

[0157] 4) Post-transition zone: K1+210~K1+225 (15m);

[0158] 5) Rear buffer zone: K1+225~K1+228 (3m).

[0159] Full-section coverage boreholes are laid out at each transverse borehole section, with 8 boreholes per ring, including 2 at the arch crown, 2 at the arch waist, 2 at the sidewalls, and 2 at the base plate. The boreholes are laid out differently for each area, as shown in Table 1 below:

[0160] Table 1: Comparison of Borehole Coverage Area Layout

[0161]

[0162] In the core area (K1+200~K1+210), there are 11 longitudinal sections (1 per 1m in K1+200~K1+210), with 8 boreholes in each section, totaling 88 boreholes. Along the tunnel axis, the boreholes are arranged in a "grid + radial" dual-mode, with the borehole positions on the tunnel wall staggered in a quincunx pattern to avoid monitoring interference. At the same time, with the center of the tunnel face at K1+205 as the origin, 24 boreholes are drilled radially towards the core area at 15° intervals to enhance the monitoring of the water diversion channel.

[0163] The transition zones (K1+185~K1+200, K1+210~K1+225) are laid out with a circumferential gradient of measuring points, with one ring of measuring points every 2m longitudinally (a total of 15 rings), and 8 holes in each ring; each transition zone has 15 rings × 8 holes = 120 holes, for a total of 240 holes in the two transition zones. The hole spacing gradually changes from 1m to 3m as the water pressure decreases (1m for rings near the core zone, and 3m for rings farther from the core zone).

[0164] The buffer zone (K1+182~K1+185, K1+225~K1+228) has one ring of measuring points every 3m, with 8 holes per ring (the number of holes in the arch waist can also be reduced); each buffer zone has 1 ring × 8 holes = 8 holes, for a total of 16 holes for the two buffer zones. The hole depth is consistent with the transition zone to ensure coverage of potential hidden cracks.

[0165] Sensor installation and debugging shall be completed within 24 hours after drilling is completed. The parameter acquisition frequency in the core area shall be once every 10 minutes, and in the transition area and buffer zone, it shall be once every 30 minutes, with continuous acquisition for no less than 72 hours.

[0166] Using section K1+205 (a densely packed area of ​​water-conducting channels) in the core area as a typical detection point, the basic parameters of this area obtained through detection are: water inflow per unit length before grouting. It is 8.5m 3 / h·m, water inflow per unit length after grouting 1.2m 3 / h·m, permeability coefficient before grouting 3.2×10 -3 cm / s, permeability coefficient after grouting 4.5×10 -5 cm / s, water head difference before grouting The depth is 42.5m, and the head difference after grouting is... The length is 58.3m, and the grout filling rate is... The longitudinal wave velocity before grouting was 89.6%. The longitudinal wave velocity after grouting is 1850 m / s. The maximum strain of the rock mass is 3280 m / s, the fracture closure rate is 78.2%, and the maximum strain of the rock mass is... The rock mass strain rate is 3.2 με / d, the rock mass compressive strength before grouting is 12.8 MPa, the rock mass compressive strength after grouting is 25.3 MPa, and the grout compressive strength is 32.6 MPa.

[0167] Key coefficients are selected according to the principle of scenario adaptation: weight adjustment coefficient A value of 0.6 is chosen as the intermediate adaptation value for the water-rich core area, balancing subjective and sensitivity weights; the weight of the inflow attenuation term... The value is set to 0.6, which aligns with the characteristics of the soft rock and water-rich strata in this region, emphasizing the priority of water inflow as a core indicator for mitigating water hazards; the weight of the P-wave velocity increase rate is also considered. A value of 0.55 is selected to suit the working conditions where fracture filling and rock mass cementation are balanced in fault fracture zones, comprehensively reflecting the mechanical properties of the rock mass and the fracture sealing effect after grouting; the weight of the water head difference ratio is also considered. The value was set at 0.3 to suit medium-stress formation environments, with a focus on the critical role of rock mass strain safety in structural stability; risk balance coefficient. A value of 0.3 is used, which is a common value for conventional water-rich faults, to reasonably strengthen the evaluation weight of high-risk areas; the allowable ultimate strain of the rock mass... Based on the hard rock classification standard, 150με was selected, which is consistent with the lithological characteristics of the tunnel surrounding rock; the maximum initial water pressure in the region. The measured pressure was 2.8 MPa, corresponding to a head difference of approximately 285.7 m, and the maximum initial inflow rate in the area. The actual measured value is 12.3 m³ / h m, both are core benchmark data for the risk assessment of water hazards along this fault.

[0168] By coupling the improved Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) with the sensitivity analysis of hydrological parameters, the water-blocking efficiency index was obtained. Weight The grout-rock mass synergistic integrity index is 0.45. Weight The water stability safety index is 0.35. Weight The value was 0.20. The extreme value standardization method was further used to normalize the 10 basic parameters to eliminate the difference in dimensions. The final standardized values ​​all fell within the range of [0,1]. Among them, the standardized value of water inflow was 0.952, the permeability coefficient was 0.991, the head difference was 0.638, and the grout filling rate was 0.740.

[0169] Calculate the core evaluation index:

[0170] 1) Water blocking efficiency index The result, obtained by weighting the inflow rate reduction rate and the permeability coefficient reduction rate, is 0.909, indicating that the water-blocking effect is significant.

[0171] 2) Grouting body-rock mass synergistic integrity index The result of combining the longitudinal wave velocity increase rate and the grout filling rate is 0.828, reflecting a significant improvement in rock mass integrity.

[0172] 3) Water stability safety index The combined effect of head difference control and rock mass strain safety yielded a result of 0.715, indicating that the structural stability met the standard.

[0173] Considering that this section is a high-risk water diversion channel area, the water hazard risk correction coefficient is calculated. =1.031, strengthening the evaluation weight of high-risk areas. Overall Effectiveness Index E The result, calculated using a weighted average of core indicators coupled with risk correction, is 0.868. According to the judgment criteria... E A value of ≥0.85 indicates an excellent level, signifying that the grouting treatment at this section has met the standards: sufficient water blocking, intact rock mass, and good stability, requiring no further grouting. Subsequent monitoring only needs to be maintained in the core area every 10 minutes, focusing on tracking strain and water pressure changes to ensure long-term stability.

[0174] In another aspect, the present invention also discloses a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, causes the processor to perform the steps of the method described above.

[0175] In another aspect, the present invention also discloses a computer device, including a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores a computer program, and when the computer program is executed by the processor, the processor performs the steps of the method described above.

[0176] In another embodiment provided in this application, a computer program product containing instructions is also provided, which, when run on a computer, causes the computer to execute the multi-dimensional detection and quantitative evaluation method for the treatment effect of water damage grouting in any of the above embodiments of fault fracture zones.

[0177] It is understood that the system provided in the embodiments of the present invention corresponds to the method provided in the embodiments of the present invention, and the explanation, examples and beneficial effects of the relevant content can be referred to the corresponding parts of the above methods.

[0178] This application also provides an electronic device, including a processor, a communication interface, a memory, and a communication bus, wherein the processor, communication interface, and memory communicate with each other via the communication bus.

[0179] Memory, used to store computer programs;

[0180] When the processor executes the program stored in the memory, it implements the above-mentioned method for multi-dimensional detection and quantitative evaluation of the grouting treatment effect of water damage in fault fracture zones.

[0181] The communication bus mentioned in the above-mentioned electronic devices can be a standard bus for interconnecting peripheral components or an extended industrial standard structure bus, etc. This communication bus can be divided into address bus, data bus, control bus, etc.

[0182] The communication interface is used for communication between the aforementioned electronic devices and other devices.

[0183] The memory may include random access memory or non-volatile memory, such as at least one disk storage device. Optionally, the memory may also be at least one storage device located remotely from the aforementioned processor.

[0184] The processors mentioned above can be general-purpose processors, including central processing units, network processors, etc.; they can also be digital signal processors, application-specific integrated circuits, field-programmable gate arrays or other programmable logic devices, discrete gate or transistor logic devices, or discrete hardware components.

[0185] In the above embodiments, implementation can be achieved entirely or partially through software, hardware, firmware, or any combination thereof. When implemented using software, it can be implemented entirely or partially in the form of a computer program product. The computer program product includes one or more computer instructions. When the computer program instructions are loaded and executed on a computer, all or part of the processes or functions described in the embodiments of this application are generated. The computer can be a general-purpose computer, a special-purpose computer, a computer network, or other programmable device. The computer instructions can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium or transmitted from one computer-readable storage medium to another. For example, the computer instructions can be transmitted from one website, computer, server, or data center to another website, computer, server, or data center via wired or wireless means. The computer-readable storage medium can be any available medium accessible to a computer or a data storage device such as a server or data center that integrates one or more available media. The available medium can be a magnetic medium, an optical medium, or a semiconductor medium, etc.

[0186] The above description is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the present invention. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc., made within the spirit and principles of the present invention should be included within the protection scope of the present invention.

[0187] Furthermore, it should be noted that if any directional indication (such as up, down, left, right, front, back, etc.) is involved in the embodiments of the present invention, the directional indication is only used to explain the relative positional relationship and movement of each component in a specific posture. If the specific posture changes, the directional indication will also change accordingly.

[0188] Furthermore, if the embodiments of this invention involve descriptions such as "first" or "second," these descriptions are for descriptive purposes only and should not be construed as indicating or implying their relative importance or implicitly specifying the number of technical features indicated. Therefore, a feature defined with "first" or "second" may explicitly or implicitly include at least one of those features. Additionally, the meaning of "and / or" throughout the text includes three parallel solutions; for example, "A and / or B" includes solution A, solution B, or a solution where both A and B are satisfied simultaneously. Furthermore, in the embodiments of this invention, "multiple" refers to two or more. Moreover, the technical solutions of the various embodiments can be combined with each other, but this must be based on the ability of those skilled in the art to implement them. When the combination of technical solutions is contradictory or cannot be implemented, it should be considered that such a combination of technical solutions does not exist and is not within the scope of protection claimed by this invention.

Claims

1. A method for multidimensional detection and quantitative evaluation of the effect of grouting treatment for water damage in fault fracture zones, characterized in that, include: Step S1. Construct a three-dimensional hydrogeological model of the fault fracture zone containing a water-rich core area, water diversion channels, and water pressure distribution. Set up measuring points in the geological area of ​​the model to form a three-dimensional monitoring network covering the water hazard risk area of ​​the fault fracture zone. Step S2. Obtain basic parameters by borehole water level monitoring at the actual points corresponding to the model measurement points; Step S3. The basic parameters are normalized using the extreme value standardization method, and the corresponding index weights of the basic parameters are calculated by coupling the improved analytic hierarchy process with the hydrological parameter sensitivity analysis method. Step S4. Calculate the water-blocking efficiency index using standardized hydrological, physical, and mechanical parameters. Grouting-Rock Mass Synergistic Integrity Index and water stability safety index ; Step S5. Based on , , The effect level is calculated using a comprehensive index formula with spatial risk correction, which is used to determine the effect of grouting treatment for water damage in fault fracture zones. The coupling formula in step S3 is as follows: In the formula, For the first The overall weight of each indicator For subjective weights in the analytic hierarchy process, For the sensitivity weights of hydrological parameters, This is the weighting adjustment coefficient; Before performing the index weight coupling calculation in step S3, the hydrological parameters, physical parameters, and mechanical parameters are standardized according to the specified index type to normalize them to the [0,1] interval, wherein: Based on the correlation between parameter values ​​and evaluation objectives, the hydrological parameters, physical parameters, and mechanical parameters are categorized into superior performance indicators and controllability indicators. The superior performance indicators include the post-grouting head difference. Grouting filling rate Longitudinal wave velocity after grouting The control indicators include fracture closure degree, rock mass compressive strength, and grout compressive strength, and the post-grouting water inflow rate is also considered. Permeability coefficient after grouting Maximum strain of rock mass after grouting and strain rate after grouting; The superiority-type indicators and the suppression-type indicators are standardized as follows: in, This is the original data. , These are the maximum and minimum values ​​of the indicator, respectively. Sensitivity weights of hydrophysical parameters in step S3 The calculation formula is: in, This represents the change in the permeability coefficient. The change in the indicator; In step S4, a water-blocking efficiency index is established to comprehensively quantify the effectiveness of grouting in controlling water damage. Grouting-Rock Mass Synergistic Integrity Index And the water stability safety index that considers the coordinated safety of water pressure and rock mass deformation ,in: Water blocking efficiency index for: In the formula, The weight of the inflow rate attenuation term, , These represent the water inflow per unit length before and after grouting. , These are the permeability coefficients before and after grouting; A synergistic integrity index of grout-rock mass was established by integrating acoustic wave velocity and grout filling rate. ,for: In the formula, As the weight of the longitudinal wave velocity rise rate, , These represent the longitudinal wave velocities of the rock mass before and after grouting. The grout volume filling rate; Establish a water stability safety index that considers the coordinated safety of water pressure and rock mass deformation. ,for: In the formula, The weights of the head difference ratio, , These represent the difference in water head before and after grouting. This represents the maximum strain of the rock mass after grouting. The allowable ultimate strain of the rock mass is determined according to lithological classification. The specific calculation process for calculating the effect level using the comprehensive index formula for spatial risk correction in step S5 includes: Based on the coupled risk assessment logic of water pressure and inflow rate, a water hazard risk correction coefficient is established to strengthen the evaluation weight of high-risk areas, for detection points. Water hazard risk correction coefficient The calculation formula is: In the formula, For risk balancing coefficient, For detection points The initial water pressure, This represents the water inflow per unit length before grouting. The maximum initial water pressure in the region. This represents the maximum initial inflow rate in the area. Based on the water hazard risk correction coefficient, multi-dimensional indicators are integrated to form a unified decision-making basis, and a comprehensive effect index is established. for: In the formula, For the first The comprehensive weight of each core evaluation indicator exists. , , The water blocking efficiency index is as follows: Weights, Grout-Rock Mass Synergistic Integrity Index Weights and water stability safety index The weight, For the first One core evaluation indicator, , , Equivalently represented as the water-blocking efficiency index Grouting-Rock Mass Synergistic Integrity Index Water stability safety index .

2. The method for multi-dimensional detection and quantitative evaluation of the grouting treatment effect for water damage in fault fracture zones as described in claim 1, characterized in that, In step S1, the three-dimensional hydrogeological model is initially constructed based on advanced geological forecast data, which incorporates horizontal hydrological borehole inflow or water pressure tests to determine the water-rich core area, transition zone and water diversion channel orientation in the model. The source of the advanced geological prediction data is set to at least one of the following methods: seismic wave detection, ground-penetrating radar, infrared water detection, and horizontal borehole detection. The water-rich core area is defined as a region where the water flow rate is greater than or equal to a preset value A or the water pressure is greater than or equal to a preset value B. A set of preset water flow rate limits A' and water pressure limits B' are provided. The transition zone is set as the area where the water flow rate is within the preset range A' to A and the water pressure is within the preset range B' to B.

3. The method for multi-dimensional detection and quantitative evaluation of the grouting treatment effect for water damage in fault fracture zones as described in claim 2, characterized in that, The three-dimensional monitoring network for the water hazard risk zone in the fractured fault zone described in step S1 includes multiple monitoring points located at grouting holes and tunnel exploration holes. These points are used to simultaneously collect hydrological, physical, and mechanical parameters, wherein: Within the water-rich core area, a grid is used to lay out radial points with a spacing of ≤1m between points, and the boreholes are arranged in a quincunx pattern. Within the transition zone, monitoring points are arranged in a gradient according to water pressure and inflow rate, with a spacing of 1-3m. At least one set of ring monitoring points is set for every 0.2MPa water pressure, ultimately forming a three-dimensional monitoring network for the grouting body and surrounding rock mass.

4. The method for multi-dimensional detection and quantitative evaluation of the grouting treatment effect for water damage in fault fracture zones as described in claim 3, characterized in that, The basic parameters in step S2 include hydrological parameters, physical parameters, and mechanical parameters, which are acquired through a three-dimensional monitoring network, wherein: The hydrological parameters include the inflow rate. Permeability coefficient and head difference The water inflow rate in the aforementioned hydrological parameters The weir measurement method was used to monitor and obtain the water inflow per unit length before and after grouting. , The permeability coefficient The permeability coefficient before and after grouting was calculated using a three-stage hydraulic pressure test in the borehole. , The head difference The borehole water level changes before and after grouting were monitored using a water level gauge of specified accuracy, and the head difference before and after grouting was calculated. , get; The physical parameters include the grout filling rate. Longitudinal wave velocity And the degree of crack closure, the filling rate of the grouting body The longitudinal wave velocity was obtained by inversion calculation based on the difference in electromagnetic wave reflection between the grouting body and the rock mass. Single-hole or multi-hole acoustic wave detection is employed, specifically including longitudinal wave velocities before and after grouting. , The wave velocity rise rate is used to calculate the fracture closure degree, which is obtained by inverting the fracture closure degree based on the correlation model between wave velocity and fracture density. The mechanical parameters include rock mass strain and compressive strength. The rock mass strain is monitored by distributed optical fiber to detect the maximum strain of the rock mass after grouting. The strain rate is calculated, and the compressive strength is obtained by core sampling of the rock mass and the grout body, and is used as a supplementary parameter for stability evaluation.

5. The method for multi-dimensional detection and quantitative evaluation of the grouting treatment effect for water damage in fault fracture zones as described in claim 1, characterized in that, The specific criteria for determining the effectiveness of grouting treatment for water damage in the fault fracture zone in step S5 are as follows: like If so, the effect is judged to be of excellent level; like If so, the effect is judged to be of a good level; like If so, the effect is judged to be at the qualified level; like If the result is not satisfactory, the outcome will be deemed unqualified.

Images