Underground cavern axis generation and site selection scheme linkage decision-making method based on arrangement rule base and geometric constraint algorithm

Abstract

The invention belongs to the technical field of linkage decision-making of underground cavern site selection and axis selection, and provides an underground cavern axis generation and site selection scheme linkage decision-making method based on an arrangement rule base and a geometric constraint algorithm, and the method comprises the following steps: firstly, determining a candidate axis direction; secondly, based on the candidate axis direction, setting a main plant positioning and axis application rule, a correlation cavern relative position rule, a cavern spacing and geometric constraint rule and a geologic feature avoidance rule, and establishing a plant site-axis binding scheme; then, establishing a dynamic quantitative evaluation index related to the axis, and carrying out batch scoring on the factory site-axis binding scheme; and finally, obtaining an optimal factory site position and an optimal axis direction based on a scoring result.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of linkage decision-making technology for underground cavern site selection and axis selection, and particularly to a linkage decision-making method for underground cavern axis generation and site selection scheme based on layout rule base and geometric constraint algorithm. Background Technology

[0002] Current underground cavern design suffers from a disconnect between the "axis design" and "scheme selection" stages. The commonly used approach is a traditional sequential design process (first manually selecting several schemes, then comparing them). However, this process suffers from inherent "path dependence." Engineers, limited by experience and time, often propose "conventional" or "safe" initial schemes, rather than "optimal" ones. Many theoretically better axis angles may never be considered because they were "unforeseen" or "deemed unsuitable." This process, where engineers generate a few (usually 2-3) axis schemes based on experience and then select the best one using decision-making methods, heavily relies on the quality of the initial schemes. If the initial schemes fail to cover the true optimal solution, subsequent selection becomes a matter of "choosing the best among the worst," making it difficult to guarantee the global optimality of the final scheme.

[0003] This invention is based on two patent applications filed by the applicant on the same filing date: "A method for generating and determining the axis of underground caverns based on a multi-objective spatial optimization model" and "A method for selecting the location of underground caverns based on a comprehensive index system". Summary of the Invention

[0004] The purpose of this invention is to provide a linkage decision-making method for generating and selecting underground cavern axis schemes based on a layout rule base and geometric constraint algorithm. This invention aims to break through the limitations of human experience and solve the problem of how to automatically generate a large number of high-quality candidate axis schemes and seamlessly link them with the optimization decision system, thereby ensuring that the optimal or near-optimal site and axis layout scheme is found from a global perspective.

[0005] The technical solution adopted by this invention to solve its technical problem is as follows: A method for coordinated decision-making regarding the generation and site selection of underground cavern axes based on a layout rule base and a geometric constraint algorithm, characterized by the following steps: Determine the direction of the candidate axis; Based on the candidate axis direction, set the main plant positioning and axis application rules, the relative position rules of associated caverns, the cavern spacing and geometric constraint rules, and the avoidance rules of geological features, and establish a plant site-axis binding scheme; Establish dynamic quantitative evaluation indicators related to the axis and conduct batch scoring of the site-axis binding scheme; The optimal plant site location and optimal axis direction are obtained based on the scoring results.

[0006] In some embodiments, determining the candidate axis direction includes the following steps: The orientation of the main structural planes of the underground cavern, the orientation of the rock strata of the underground cavern, and the direction of the maximum horizontal principal stress are used as key parameters. Automatically traverses all possible axis directions within the range of 0° to 180° with a preset step size; Calculate the initial score for all possible axis directions; Select a predetermined number of candidate axis directions with the highest initial scores and use them as the final candidate axis directions.

[0007] In some embodiments, the main plant positioning and axis application rules refer to: taking the determined candidate axis direction as the direction of the longitudinal axis of the main plant. The phrase "taking the determined candidate axis direction as the longitudinal axis of the main plant" means: Within the designated plant site area, one or more possible starting points for the main plant are determined based on the area's topography and geological boundary constraints. Starting from the starting point, a straight line segment is automatically generated along the determined candidate axis direction and the opposite direction, based on the preset length of the main plant. This line segment represents the axis position and direction of the main plant.

[0008] In some embodiments, the relative position rules of the associated chambers refer to: the relative positions of the main transformer room and the main powerhouse, and the relative positions of the tailrace surge chamber and the main powerhouse. The relative position of the main transformer room and the main plant means that the main transformer room is arranged parallel to the main plant. The arrangement of the main transformer room parallel to the main plant means that a line segment parallel to the main plant axis is generated on one side of the main plant axis at a preset interval, and its length is determined according to the size of the main transformer room. The relative position of the tailrace surge chamber to the main powerhouse refers to the fact that the tailrace surge chamber is located at the end or side of the powerhouse according to hydraulic connections and geological conditions. The tailrace surge chamber is located at the end or side of the plant according to hydraulic connections and geological conditions. This means that the system automatically calculates the position and orientation of the tailrace surge chamber based on the selected template and preset spacing parameters.

[0009] In some embodiments, the cavern spacing and geometric constraint rules refer to the following: the minimum rock column thickness between any two main caverns is greater than or equal to the minimum value required by the specifications. The minimum rock column thickness between any two main chambers being greater than or equal to the minimum value required by the standard means that: Generate the outline of each cavity and perform collision detection and spacing verification; If the spacing between some chambers in the automatically generated scheme is less than the minimum value required by the specification, the position fine-tuning algorithm is triggered. The associated chambers are then moved along the normal direction by the position fine-tuning algorithm until all spacing constraints are met.

[0010] In some embodiments, the avoidance rules for geological features refer to: the overall layout of the cavern complex avoids known large unfavorable geological bodies and makes full use of favorable terrain; The overall layout of the cavern complex avoids known large unfavorable geological formations and makes full use of favorable terrain, meaning: Read the geological defect layer of the plant site area; When generating the layout plan, ensure that the axis of the main plant and key caverns maintains a safe clearance distance from the defects in the geological defect layer. At the same time, the layout tends to select areas with thick mountains and thick overburden.

[0011] In some embodiments, establishing the plant site-axis binding scheme includes the following steps: Obtain the candidate axis direction, the boundary of the target plant site area, and the geological model of the target plant site area; The preliminary location of the main plant within the plant site is determined based on the main plant positioning and axis application rules. The main plant axis is generated based on the main plant positioning and axis application rules, using the candidate axis directions. The associated chambers are automatically arranged according to the relative position rules of the associated chambers, and the associated chambers include the main transformer chamber and the tailrace pressure regulating chamber; The spacing between operating chambers is subject to geometric constraints and avoidance rules for geological features. The spacing between chambers and their positional relationship with geological defects are checked and fine-tuned. A site-axis binding scheme is formed that includes the precise coordinates, axes, and contours of all chambers.

[0012] In some embodiments, the established dynamic quantitative evaluation index related to the axis includes: a quantitative index of surrounding rock stability, a dynamic index of construction conditions, and a dynamic estimation index of investment costs. The surrounding rock stability quantification index refers to: when determining the candidate axis direction, obtaining the structural surface stability objective function and the stress state objective function, and using the calculation results of these two objective functions as secondary indicators under geological conditions, so that the key spatial relationships of the angle between the axis and the structural surface and the angle between the axis and the ground stress are transformed from design principles into quantifiable scoring inputs; The aforementioned dynamic indicators of construction conditions refer to the dynamic evaluation of excavation and tunneling conditions, tunnel length, and ventilation shaft layout under different axial directions, based on the newly generated site-axis binding scheme. The aforementioned dynamic estimation of investment costs refers to: based on the spatial relationship between the axis and the geological structure, using empirical formulas or database queries, making differentiated estimates of support costs, and feeding these estimates back into the investment condition indicators.

[0013] The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: First, by automatically traversing and generating a large number of candidate axis schemes using a computer, this invention overcomes the limitations of manually designed schemes, greatly increasing the probability of finding the globally optimal or near-optimal scheme, thus improving the quality of engineering design from the source. Second, through the linked closed-loop process of "automatic scheme generation" and "scheme optimization," this invention solves the problem of disconnect between the two stages and the inability to guarantee the quality of the initial scheme in the traditional process, ensuring global optimality. Furthermore, this invention liberates engineers from repetitive scheme conception and preliminary comparison work, transforming their role into setting rules and making final decisions. The automated process makes it possible to evaluate hundreds or thousands of schemes in a short time, greatly shortening the early design cycle. At the same time, the entire process in this invention, from scheme generation to optimization, is completely data-driven, avoiding subjective bias caused by premature human intervention. The decision-making basis and process are clear and traceable, enhancing the persuasiveness of the conclusions. Moreover, this invention avoids the static problem of existing methods that can only compare fixed schemes, realizing the dynamic generation and optimization of schemes, resulting in a highly objective and transparent decision-making process. Attached Figure Description

[0014] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of a linkage decision-making method for generating and selecting the location of underground cavern axes based on a layout rule base and a geometric constraint algorithm, according to an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0015] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention clearer, 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 some embodiments of the present invention, and not all embodiments. The components of the embodiments of the present invention described and shown in the accompanying drawings can generally be arranged and designed in various different configurations.

[0016] Example

[0017] This embodiment provides a linked decision-making method for generating and selecting the location of underground cavern axes based on a layout rule base and a geometric constraint algorithm. See the flowchart below. Figure 1 The method may include the following steps: S1. Determine the direction of the candidate axis; S2. Based on the candidate axis direction, set the main plant positioning and axis application rules, the relative position rules of associated caverns, the cavern spacing and geometric constraint rules, and the avoidance rules of geological features, and establish a plant site-axis binding scheme; S3. Establish dynamic quantitative evaluation indicators related to the axis and conduct batch scoring of the site-axis binding scheme; S4. Based on the scoring results, obtain the optimal plant site location and optimal axis direction.

[0018] In this embodiment, it is necessary to first determine the candidate axis direction, and then establish a site-axis binding scheme and score and select the optimal result based on this scheme. The axis generation and determination scheme in the patent application "A Method for Generating and Determining the Axis of Underground Caverns Based on a Multi-Objective Spatial Optimization Model" can be referenced first. After determining the axis direction, the candidate axis directions are then selected based on the score. Therefore, in this embodiment, determining the candidate axis direction may include the following steps: S101. The orientation of the main structural plane of the underground cavern, the orientation of the rock strata of the underground cavern, and the direction of the maximum horizontal principal stress are used as key parameters. S102. Automatically traverse all possible axis directions within the range of 0° to 180° with a preset step size of 0° (e.g., 1°); S103. Calculate the initial score for all possible axis directions. When calculating the score, a multi-objective spatial optimization model can be used. S104. Select the preset number of candidate axis directions with the highest initial scores and use them as the determined candidate axis directions.

[0019] After determining the candidate axis direction in step S1, the system does not arrange the layout arbitrarily in step S2. Instead, it automatically generates a complete cavern group layout scheme within the specified site area based on an embedded layout rule library and geometric constraint algorithm that is based on engineering design specifications and practical experience.

[0020] These rules and algorithms mainly include the following aspects: 1. Main plant location and axis application rules: The core of these rules is to use the selected axis direction as the direction of the main plant's longitudinal axis. The specific operation of using the selected axis direction as the main plant's longitudinal axis means that the system, within a specified plant site area (e.g., within the Digital Terrain Model (DTM) of plant site A), determines one or more possible starting points for the main plant based on constraints such as the area's topography and geological boundaries (e.g., considering the exit location of the access tunnel to the plant, or areas with suitable overburden thickness). Starting from these starting points, along the determined candidate axis direction and the direction opposite to the determined candidate axis direction, a straight line segment is automatically generated according to the preset length of the main plant. This line segment represents the axis position and orientation of the main plant.

[0021] 2. Relative Position Rules of Related Caverns: Since the main transformer room, tailrace surge tank, and other structures in the cavern group are not arranged independently, but have a relatively fixed spatial relationship with the main powerhouse, the system is arranged according to the following typical rules: (1) The relative position of the main transformer room and the main powerhouse is as follows: the main transformer room is usually arranged parallel to the main powerhouse. When setting parameters, the system maintains a default spacing value D_transformer (e.g., 30 meters). This value can be adjusted according to the surrounding rock grade. In specific operation, the system generates a line segment parallel to the main powerhouse axis on one side of the main powerhouse axis (preset according to the overall layout scheme, such as the downstream side) with spacing D_transformer. Its length is determined according to the scale of the main transformer room. (2) The relative position of the tailrace surge chamber and the main powerhouse is as follows: The tailrace surge chamber can be arranged at the end or side of the powerhouse according to the hydraulic connection and geological conditions. When setting parameters, the system has a variety of layout templates (such as "end type" and "side type"). For example, in the "end type" template, the axis of the surge chamber is perpendicular to the axis of the main powerhouse and is located at the end of the main powerhouse. In specific operation, the system automatically calculates the position and direction of the surge chamber according to the selected template and the preset spacing parameters.

[0022] 3. Cavern Spacing and Geometric Constraints: To ensure the overall stability of the cavern group, a safe distance must be maintained between caverns. The rule is that the minimum rock column thickness between any two main caverns must be greater than or equal to the minimum value D_min required by the specification. In practice, after generating the outline of each cavern, the system will perform collision detection and spacing verification. If the spacing between some caverns in the automatically generated scheme is less than D_min, the system will trigger a position fine-tuning algorithm, such as translating the associated caverns along the normal direction, until all spacing constraints are met.

[0023] 4. Avoidance rules for terrain / geological features: The overall layout of the cavern complex should avoid known large unfavorable geological bodies (such as large faults and fracture zones) and make full use of favorable terrain. In specific operation, the system reads the geological defect layer (such as fault lines) of the plant site area. When generating the layout plan, it will ensure that the axis of the main plant and other key caverns maintains a safe avoidance distance from these defects. At the same time, the layout will tend to select areas with thick mountains and thick overburden. This information can be obtained from digital terrain models and geological models.

[0024] Based on the rules provided above, a site-axis binding scheme can be established. Therefore, in this embodiment, establishing a site-axis binding scheme may include the following steps: S201. Obtain the candidate axis direction, the boundary of the target plant site area, and the geological model of the target plant site area; S202. Determine the preliminary location of the main plant within the plant site based on the main plant positioning and axis application rules; S203. Generate the main plant axis based on the main plant positioning and axis application rules using the candidate axis directions; S204. Automatically arrange related caverns according to the relative position rules of related caverns, wherein the related caverns include the main transformer room and the tailrace pressure regulating room; S205. The spacing between operating caverns and the rules for geometric constraints and avoidance of geological features are checked and fine-tuned to ensure the feasibility of the plan. S206. Form a site-axis binding scheme that includes the precise coordinates, axes, and contours of all caverns.

[0025] The final site-axis binding scheme can be evaluated in batches for optimal selection.

[0026] Therefore, this embodiment realizes the automatic, rapid and scientific generation of three-dimensional layout schemes from a single axis direction to complex cavern groups by regularizing, parameterizing and algorithmizing the above-mentioned engineering design knowledge. This ensures that the subsequent optimization process evaluates a large number of real, feasible and high-quality alternative schemes, thereby fundamentally solving the pain points of low quality and incomplete coverage of the initial scheme set in traditional methods.

[0027] When evaluating and selecting the best site-axis binding schemes in batches, one can refer to "A Method for Site Selection of Underground Caverns Based on a Comprehensive Index System." However, the core of that basic patent application is to select the best one based on a multi-criteria decision-making method, given a predetermined set of schemes. It doesn't concern itself with how the schemes were derived, essentially applying the entropy weight method. This embodiment, on the other hand, is equivalent to a "generation-evaluation" linkage system. Its core function is to automatically create a massive, high-quality set of candidate schemes and then use an "evaluator" for screening, essentially representing a new linkage decision-making method. Therefore, after establishing the correlation between the axis direction and the site, the subsequent site selection strategy in this embodiment differs fundamentally from the aforementioned patent application, specifically in the following three aspects: Difference 1: The objects of selection are fundamentally different (from "static plant site" to "dynamic solution package").

[0028] Methods for handling basic patents: The preferred options are: several predefined, fixed site options (such as "site A", "site B", "site C"). Each site option usually implies a default, empirical axis direction.

[0029] The processing logic is: it evaluates "where" (building). It is a static comparison.

[0030] The processing method in this embodiment: The preferred option is a dynamically generated "site-axis" combination scheme (such as "site A-axis 105°", "site A-axis 72°", "site B-axis 105°").

[0031] The processing logic is to evaluate "where and how to build it". This is a dynamic, combinatorial optimization problem.

[0032] Therefore, in this embodiment, the same site (such as site A) may generate multiple different candidate solutions because it is associated with different axial directions. This means that the system no longer evaluates the inherent properties of "site A" itself, but "the comprehensive performance of site A under a specific axial direction", which completely changes the basic unit of selection.

[0033] Difference 2: Expansion and deepening of the evaluation indicator system.

[0034] The basic patent processing method: Its evaluation index system (such as geology, topography, construction, investment, etc.) is to score a given site and a given layout. The axial direction is a fixed value, and its advantages and disadvantages are implicit in the expert experience scoring of indicators such as "geological conditions" and "construction conditions", and are not explicitly and independently quantified.

[0035] The processing method in this embodiment is as follows: Based on inheriting all the indicator systems of the basic patent, it is necessary to introduce or strengthen the evaluation indicators that are strongly correlated with the axial direction.

[0036] For example, the quantitative index of surrounding rock stability directly utilizes the calculation results of the structural surface stability objective function and the stress state objective function in step S1 of this invention as a secondary index under "geological conditions". This transforms key spatial relationships such as "angle between axis and structural surface" and "angle between axis and geostress" from design principles into quantifiable scoring inputs.

[0037] Dynamic indicators of construction conditions: Different axial directions may lead to changes in excavation entry conditions, adit lengths, and ventilation shaft layouts, thereby affecting construction difficulty and schedule. These need to be dynamically evaluated based on the newly generated plan.

[0038] Dynamic cost estimation: Changes in the axis direction may lead to significant differences in the amount of support work (anchor bolts, shotcrete). The system can estimate the support cost differentially based on the spatial relationship between the axis and the geological structure, using empirical formulas or database queries, and then feed this estimate back into the "investment conditions" indicator.

[0039] Therefore, this embodiment enables the evaluation index system to receive and process the dynamic impact of changes in axis direction through linkage, thereby making a more refined and accurate evaluation of each "site-axis" combination than the basic patent.

[0040] Difference 3: The sublimation of decision-making goals and results.

[0041] The decision-making objective of the basic patent is to output an optimal factory site location. For example, the conclusion might be "It is recommended to build at site A".

[0042] The decision objective of this embodiment is to output an optimal integrated "site-axis" solution. For example, the conclusion is "a 68° axis layout is recommended for site B".

[0043] In addition, the system can also perform lateral insight analysis, such as: The discovery that "axis 105°" consistently ranks highly in the overall scores of multiple plant sites suggests that "axis 105° is the recommended direction for this project area," a conclusion of higher value than simply selecting a single plant site. The analysis reveals that a particular plant site (such as site A) was not selected because all its possible axis directions scored poorly, thus explaining the site's inherent disadvantages.

[0044] Therefore, the decision result of this embodiment is no longer a single-dimensional "site selection", but a two-dimensional or even multi-dimensional "integrated optimization of site selection and axis", providing richer and more in-depth decision support information. The differences between this embodiment and the basic patent in different dimensions are shown in Table 1: Table 1. Differences between this embodiment and the basic patent from different dimensions. Therefore, based on the above distinctions, it can be seen that this embodiment and the basic patent are complementary rather than competitive. This embodiment constructs a higher-level intelligent decision-making framework that covers the entire design process, while the optimization engine of the basic patent is a crucial link in this framework. This integrated innovation produces a systemic effect of "1+1>2", solving the fundamental problem of "a skilled cook cannot cook without rice" in the traditional process.

[0045] It should be noted that, in this embodiment, the established dynamic quantitative evaluation index related to the axis includes: surrounding rock stability quantitative index, construction condition dynamic index, and investment cost dynamic estimation index. The surrounding rock stability quantification index refers to: when determining the candidate axis direction, obtaining the structural surface stability objective function and the stress state objective function, and using the calculation results of these two objective functions as secondary indicators under geological conditions, so that the key spatial relationships of the angle between the axis and the structural surface and the angle between the axis and the ground stress are transformed from design principles into quantifiable scoring inputs; The aforementioned dynamic indicators of construction conditions refer to the dynamic evaluation of excavation and tunneling conditions, tunnel length, and ventilation shaft layout under different axial directions, based on the newly generated site-axis binding scheme. The aforementioned dynamic estimation of investment costs refers to: based on the spatial relationship between the axis and the geological structure, using empirical formulas or database queries, making differentiated estimates of support costs, and feeding these estimates back into the investment condition indicators.

[0046] The above are merely preferred embodiments of the present invention and are not intended to limit the present invention. Various modifications and variations can be made to the present invention by those skilled in the art. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc., made within the spirit and principles of the present invention should be included within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A linked decision-making method for generating and selecting the location of underground cavern axes based on a layout rule base and a geometric constraint algorithm, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: Determine the direction of the candidate axis; Based on the candidate axis direction, set the main plant positioning and axis application rules, the relative position rules of associated caverns, the cavern spacing and geometric constraint rules, and the avoidance rules of geological features, and establish a plant site-axis binding scheme; Establish dynamic quantitative evaluation indicators related to the axis and conduct batch scoring of the site-axis binding scheme; The optimal plant site location and optimal axis direction are obtained based on the scoring results.

2. The method for joint decision-making of underground cavern axis generation and site selection scheme based on layout rule base and geometric constraint algorithm according to claim 1, characterized in that, Determining the direction of the candidate axis includes the following steps: The orientation of the main structural planes of the underground cavern, the orientation of the rock strata of the underground cavern, and the direction of the maximum horizontal principal stress are used as key parameters. Automatically traverses all possible axis directions within the range of 0° to 180° with a preset step size; Calculate the initial score for all possible axis directions; Select a predetermined number of candidate axis directions with the highest initial scores and use them as the final candidate axis directions.

3. The method for joint decision-making of underground cavern axis generation and site selection scheme based on layout rule base and geometric constraint algorithm according to claim 1, characterized in that, The main plant positioning and axis application rules refer to: taking the determined candidate axis direction as the direction of the longitudinal axis of the main plant. The phrase "taking the determined candidate axis direction as the longitudinal axis of the main plant" means: Within the designated plant site area, one or more possible starting points for the main plant are determined based on the area's topography and geological boundary constraints. Starting from the starting point, a straight line segment is automatically generated along the determined candidate axis direction and the opposite direction, based on the preset length of the main plant. This line segment represents the axis position and direction of the main plant.

4. The method for joint decision-making of underground cavern axis generation and site selection scheme based on layout rule base and geometric constraint algorithm according to claim 1, characterized in that, The relative position rules of the associated caverns refer to the relative positions of the main transformer room and the main powerhouse, as well as the relative positions of the tailrace surge chamber and the main powerhouse. The relative position of the main transformer room and the main plant means that the main transformer room is arranged parallel to the main plant. The arrangement of the main transformer room parallel to the main plant means that a line segment parallel to the main plant axis is generated on one side of the main plant axis at a preset interval, and its length is determined according to the size of the main transformer room. The relative position of the tailrace surge chamber to the main powerhouse refers to the fact that the tailrace surge chamber is located at the end or side of the powerhouse according to hydraulic connections and geological conditions. The tailrace surge chamber is located at the end or side of the plant according to hydraulic connections and geological conditions. This means that the system automatically calculates the position and orientation of the tailrace surge chamber based on the selected template and preset spacing parameters.

5. The method for joint decision-making of underground cavern axis generation and site selection scheme based on layout rule base and geometric constraint algorithm according to claim 1, characterized in that, The cavern spacing and geometric constraint rules refer to the following: the minimum rock column thickness between any two main caverns is greater than or equal to the minimum value required by the specifications. The minimum rock column thickness between any two main chambers being greater than or equal to the minimum value required by the standard means that: Generate the outline of each cavity and perform collision detection and spacing verification; If the spacing between some chambers in the automatically generated scheme is less than the minimum value required by the specification, the position fine-tuning algorithm is triggered. The associated chambers are then moved along the normal direction by the position fine-tuning algorithm until all spacing constraints are met.

6. The method for joint decision-making of underground cavern axis generation and site selection scheme based on layout rule base and geometric constraint algorithm according to claim 1, characterized in that, The rules for avoiding geological features refer to the following: the overall layout of the cavern complex avoids known large unfavorable geological formations and makes full use of favorable terrain. The overall layout of the cavern complex avoids known large unfavorable geological formations and makes full use of favorable terrain, meaning: Read the geological defect layer of the plant site area; When generating the layout plan, ensure that the axis of the main plant and key caverns maintains a safe clearance distance from the defects in the geological defect layer. At the same time, the layout tends to select areas with thick mountains and thick overburden.

7. A linkage decision-making method for generating and selecting underground cavern axes based on a layout rule base and a geometric constraint algorithm, as described in any one of claims 3-6, characterized in that... The establishment of the plant site-axis binding scheme includes the following steps: Obtain the candidate axis direction, the boundary of the target plant site area, and the geological model of the target plant site area; The preliminary location of the main plant within the plant site is determined based on the main plant positioning and axis application rules. The main plant axis is generated based on the main plant positioning and axis application rules, using the candidate axis directions. The associated chambers are automatically arranged according to the relative position rules of the associated chambers, and the associated chambers include the main transformer chamber and the tailrace pressure regulating chamber; The spacing between operating chambers is subject to geometric constraints and avoidance rules for geological features. The spacing between chambers and their positional relationship with geological defects are checked and fine-tuned. A site-axis binding scheme is formed that includes the precise coordinates, axes, and contours of all chambers.

8. The method for joint decision-making of underground cavern axis generation and site selection scheme based on layout rule base and geometric constraint algorithm according to claim 1, characterized in that, The established dynamic quantitative evaluation indicators related to the axis include: quantitative indicators of surrounding rock stability, dynamic indicators of construction conditions, and dynamic estimation indicators of investment costs. The surrounding rock stability quantification index refers to: when determining the candidate axis direction, obtaining the structural surface stability objective function and the stress state objective function, and using the calculation results of these two objective functions as secondary indicators under geological conditions, so that the key spatial relationships of the angle between the axis and the structural surface and the angle between the axis and the ground stress are transformed from design principles into quantifiable scoring inputs; The aforementioned dynamic indicators of construction conditions refer to the dynamic evaluation of excavation and tunneling conditions, tunnel length, and ventilation shaft layout under different axial directions, based on the newly generated site-axis binding scheme. The aforementioned dynamic estimation of investment costs refers to: based on the spatial relationship between the axis and the geological structure, using empirical formulas or database queries, making differentiated estimates of support costs, and feeding these estimates back into the investment condition indicators.

Images