Method for detecting quality of underwater anti-scour body of slope type normal grading artificial base throwing area

Abstract

The application provides a kind of slope normal grading artificial bed throwing filling area underwater riprap body quality detection method, relating to the technical field of underwater riprap body of throwing filling area, specific steps include: obtaining the bed plane coordinate and the boundary range of the anti-scour body, drawing the bed structure diagram and dividing a detection unit, determining the classification section to which each detection unit belongs, constructing the reference parameter vector, and combining the measured parameter vector, calculating the deviation value of slope, underwater elevation and riprap layer thickness;Count the number of deviation parameters that are not 0, obtain the consistency coefficient of each detection unit;Screening to obtain the target detection unit and determining the position influence coefficient, combining the consistency coefficient and the position influence coefficient to determine the global quality.The application combines the slope characteristics, realizes the quantitative characterization of the quality of different spatial positions, accurately reflects the degree of fit between the anti-scour body and the design requirements, realizes the quality quantization of different spatial positions, and accurately determines the global quality.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of underwater rockfill anti-erosion body technology in landfill areas, specifically a method for quality testing of underwater rockfill anti-erosion bodies in sloping, normal-graded artificial foundation landfill areas. Background Technology

[0002] In hydraulic engineering, underwater riprap embankments in sloping, graded artificial subgrade filling areas are core protective components that ensure the stability of the subgrade structure and resist water erosion. Their quality directly determines the service safety, stability, and service life of the entire underwater project. Underwater riprap embankments operate in complex underwater environments and are subject to natural factors such as waves, tides, and currents, making them prone to quality problems such as rock displacement, slope deviation, uneven riprap layer thickness, and underwater elevation shifts. These issues can lead to the failure of the embankment's protective function, causing subgrade erosion, structural instability, and other safety hazards. Therefore, accurate and comprehensive quality testing of underwater riprap embankments is crucial and a key factor in ensuring the long-term stable operation of underwater projects.

[0003] Currently, various methods for testing the quality of underwater rock-filled erosion barriers have been proposed in the industry to achieve effective control over the quality of these barriers. Among them, CN115046473A discloses a method for quality control of underwater rock-dropped anti-erosion bodies based on three-dimensional point clouds, including the following steps: acquiring three-dimensional point cloud data of the rock-dropped material according to the scanning route; extracting the particle size morphology information of the rocks on each rock-dropping vessel from the point cloud data to obtain relatively complete rock particle size information; calculating the qualified rate of rock particle size on each transport vessel to complete the rock particle size quality inspection; calculating the qualified volume of stone on each vessel and the total qualified volume of rock-dropped material on all transport vessels based on the qualified rate of rock particle size on each rock-dropping vessel; checking and judging whether the qualified volume of stone meets the design volume construction requirements to complete the volume inspection; during construction, according to the standard grid thickening requirements of the rock-dropping area and the obtained rock-dropping volume on each vessel, reasonably adjusting the position of rock-dropping vessels with different loading volumes to control the rock-dropping thickening volume in the designated area to complete the control of the thickening quality of the rock-dropping area. This method provides a more efficient and precise inspection and control method to ensure that the quality of the riprap particle size of the underwater rock-filled anti-erosion body meets the standard requirements, whether the volume of riprap meets the construction needs, and the quality of the thickening of the riprap area.

[0004] However, there are still some shortcomings, such as the lack of a parameter deviation comparison logic in the existing technology, making it impossible to obtain the consistency of core parameters, which makes it difficult to accurately quantify the degree of fit between the anti-scour body and the design requirements. At the same time, the characteristics of the underwater rock dumping anti-scour body in the filling area are not taken into account, making it impossible to quantify the quality at different locations, which ultimately leads to inaccurate quality judgment results for the entire area.

[0005] The information disclosed in the background section is only intended to enhance the understanding of the background of this disclosure, and therefore may include information that does not constitute prior art known to those skilled in the art. Summary of the Invention

[0006] The purpose of this invention is to provide a method for quality testing of underwater rockfill anti-erosion bodies in sloping, normal-graded artificial foundation filling areas, in order to solve the problems mentioned in the background art.

[0007] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention provides the following technical solution:

[0008] A method for quality testing of underwater rockfill anti-erosion bodies in sloping, normal-graded artificial subgrade filling areas, comprising the following steps:

[0009] S1. Based on the planar coordinates of the sloping, normal-graded artificial subgrade and the boundary range of the underwater rockfill erosion control body in the filling area, draw a subgrade structure diagram, and use this diagram to divide the underwater rockfill erosion control body in the filling area into... Each detection unit is identified, and the grading segment to which each detection unit belongs is determined. The design parameters corresponding to each detection unit are obtained to construct its baseline parameter vector.

[0010] S2. Collect the measured parameters of each detection unit to construct the measured parameter vector, and subtract the corresponding parameters in the measured parameter vector from the benchmark parameter vector one by one to obtain the slope deviation value, underwater elevation deviation value, and riprap layer thickness deviation value respectively.

[0011] S3. Count the number of non-zero parameters among the slope deviation value, underwater elevation deviation value, and riprap layer thickness deviation value of each detection unit, and then calculate the consistency coefficient corresponding to each detection unit.

[0012] S4. Select detection units with a consistency coefficient less than the consistency coefficient threshold as target detection units. Based on the graded section to which the target detection unit belongs, determine its positional influence coefficient. Combine the consistency coefficient and positional influence coefficient of the target detection unit to determine the overall quality status of the underwater rockfill anti-erosion body in the filling area.

[0013] Furthermore, the design parameters and measured parameters of each detection unit include slope, underwater elevation, and thickness of the riprap layer.

[0014] Furthermore, based on the subgrade structure diagram, the underwater rockfill erosion control body in the reclamation area is divided into... Each detection unit has the following specific logic:

[0015] Using the subgrade structure diagram as a spatial positioning reference, and combined with the boundary range of the underwater rockfill erosion control body in the filling area, the slope of the erosion control body is divided into multiple graded sections according to the graded boundaries of the sloping normal graded artificial subgrade.

[0016] Within each graded section, fixed-size grids are laid outwards row by row and column by column from the center of the section until the grid coverage exceeds the boundary of the underwater rockfill erosion control body slope in the filling area. The area covered by each grid is recorded as a detection unit.

[0017] After completing the grid division for all graded segments sequentially, all detection units are summarized to obtain... One detection unit.

[0018] Furthermore, for any detection unit, the ratio of the number of parameters with non-zero deviation values ​​to 3 is calculated, and the ratio is subtracted from 1 to obtain the consistency coefficient of the detection unit.

[0019] Furthermore, detection units with a consistency coefficient less than the consistency coefficient threshold are selected. The specific logic is as follows:

[0020] Set the consistency coefficient threshold to 1.0;

[0021] The consistency coefficient of each detection unit is compared with the consistency coefficient threshold one by one, and the detection units with a consistency coefficient less than the consistency coefficient threshold are selected as the target detection units.

[0022] Furthermore, based on the hierarchical segment to which the target detection unit belongs, the specific logic for determining its positional influence coefficient is as follows:

[0023] The number of graded segments is defined as And number each hierarchical segment in ascending order from bottom to top, that is, number the lowest hierarchical segment as 1, and the highest hierarchical segment as 2. ;

[0024] when When the number is odd, use the number as... The graded sections are designated as the middle section;

[0025] when When the number is even, the graded section closest to the geometric center of the slope is taken as the middle section;

[0026] Set the numbering of the central section to ,and ;

[0027] The positional influence coefficients of all detection units within the same graded section are the same;

[0028] Set the location influence coefficient of the graded segment numbered 1 to... and numbered The influence coefficient of the graded section location is set to , will be numbered The influence coefficient of the graded section location is set to ;

[0029] in, ;

[0030] From the first graded segment to the... The location influence coefficient of each graded segment decreases linearly:

[0031] The positional influence coefficient of any graded segment is first calculated by comparing the first graded segment with the second graded segment. The difference in the positional influence coefficient of each graded segment is then divided by the difference between the first graded segment and the second graded segment. The number of intervals between each graded segment is used to obtain the decrease of a unit graded segment. The decrease of a unit graded segment is multiplied by the difference in number between the graded segment and the first graded segment to obtain the cumulative decrease of the graded segment. Finally, the cumulative decrease is subtracted from the position influence coefficient of the first graded segment to obtain the position influence coefficient of the graded segment.

[0032] From the The first graded section to the first The location influence coefficient of each graded segment increases linearly:

[0033] The location influence coefficient of any graded segment is first calculated. The first graded section and the first The difference in the location influence coefficient of each graded segment, divided by the first... The first graded section and the first The interval between the segments of the first hierarchical segment is used to obtain the increment of the unit hierarchical segment. This increment of the unit hierarchical segment is then multiplied by the sum of the intervals of the first hierarchical segment and the second hierarchical segment. The cumulative increment of a given hierarchical segment is obtained by calculating the difference in the segment numbers. Finally, the increment is calculated using the number of segments. The positional influence coefficient of a graded segment plus the cumulative increment is the positional influence coefficient of that graded segment.

[0034] Based on the hierarchical segment to which the target detection unit belongs, the positional influence coefficient of the corresponding hierarchical segment is retrieved and used as the positional influence coefficient of the target detection unit.

[0035] Furthermore, by combining the consistency coefficient of the target detection unit with the corresponding position influence coefficient, the overall quality status of the underwater rockfill anti-erosion body in the filling area is determined. The specific logic is as follows:

[0036] The consistency coefficient of the target detection unit is weighted and calculated with its corresponding position influence coefficient to obtain the influence score of each target detection unit.

[0037] The comprehensive impact score of the underwater rock dumping anti-erosion body in the dumping area is obtained by summing the impact scores of all target detection units.

[0038] The calculated overall impact score is compared with the preset passing threshold:

[0039] If the comprehensive impact score of the underwater rock dumping anti-erosion body in the filling area is less than or equal to the preset qualified threshold, then the overall quality of the area is judged to be qualified.

[0040] If the overall impact score of the underwater rockfill anti-erosion body in the filling area is greater than the preset qualified threshold, then the overall quality of the area is judged to be unqualified.

[0041] Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects of the present invention are:

[0042] This invention obtains the planar coordinates of a sloping, normally graded artificial subgrade, the boundary range of the underwater rockfill erosion control body in the filling area, and draws a subgrade structure diagram, dividing the filling area into... The system consists of several detection units, each belonging to a specific grading section. The design parameters of each detection unit are used to form a reference parameter vector. The measured parameter vector is compared with the reference parameter vector one by one to obtain the deviation values ​​of slope, underwater elevation, and rockfill layer thickness. This accurately reflects the degree of conformity between the erosion control body and the design requirements. Based on this, the number of non-zero parameters in each detection unit is counted to obtain the corresponding consistency coefficient, thus achieving a quantitative representation of parameter consistency.

[0043] By selecting detection units with a consistency coefficient less than the consistency coefficient threshold as target detection units, and determining their positional influence coefficient based on the graded section to which the target detection unit belongs, the overall quality status is judged by combining the consistency coefficient and positional influence coefficient of the target detection unit. This invention combines the slope characteristics of the underwater rockfill anti-erosion body in the filling area to achieve the quantification of the quality at different spatial locations and the accurate judgment of the overall quality. Attached Figure Description

[0044] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the overall method flow of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0045] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this invention clearer, the invention will be further described in detail below with reference to specific embodiments.

[0046] It should be noted that, unless otherwise defined, the technical or scientific terms used in this invention should have the ordinary meaning understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which this invention pertains. The terms "first," "second," and similar terms used in this invention do not indicate any order, quantity, or importance, but are merely used to distinguish different components. Terms such as "comprising" or "including" mean that the element or object preceding the word encompasses the elements or objects listed following the word and their equivalents, without excluding other elements or objects. Terms such as "connected" or "linked" are not limited to physical or mechanical connections, but can include electrical connections, whether direct or indirect. Terms such as "upper," "lower," "left," and "right" are used only to indicate relative positional relationships; when the absolute position of the described object changes, the relative positional relationship may also change accordingly.

[0047] Example:

[0048] Please see Figure 1 The present invention provides a technical solution:

[0049] A method for quality testing of underwater rockfill anti-erosion bodies in sloping, normal-graded artificial subgrade filling areas, comprising the following steps:

[0050] S1. Based on the plane coordinates of the sloping normal graded artificial subgrade and the boundary range of the underwater rockfill erosion control body in the filling area, draw the subgrade structure diagram, and divide the underwater rockfill erosion control body in the filling area into M detection units, determine the graded section to which each detection unit belongs, and obtain the design parameters corresponding to each detection unit to construct its reference parameter vector.

[0051] This baseline parameter vector represents the ideal state required by the design and serves as a reference standard for subsequent comparison with the measured parameter vector and for determining construction deviations.

[0052] Based on the above embodiments, the planar coordinates of the sloping, normal-graded artificial subgrade and the boundary range of the underwater rockfill erosion control body in the filling area are obtained, and the subgrade structure diagram is drawn. The specific logic is as follows:

[0053] Collect the design drawings and construction briefing materials of the sloping normal graded artificial subgrade, extract the plane coordinate information of the subgrade, including the plane coordinates of the starting point, ending point and graded boundary point of the subgrade slope, clarify the graded boundary coordinates of the subgrade along the slope normal direction, and ensure that the coordinate data is consistent with the actual construction positioning benchmark on site;

[0054] By combining underwater detection equipment to conduct on-site surveys of the dumping area, the actual boundary coordinates of the underwater rock dumping anti-erosion body are obtained. Combined with the planned boundary of the dumping area in the design drawings, the final boundary range of the underwater rock dumping anti-erosion body in the dumping area is corrected and determined. The slope extension range, slope toe and slope top boundary coordinates of the anti-erosion body are clarified, and non-dumping areas that exceed the design range are eliminated.

[0055] Based on the obtained subgrade plane coordinates, grading and boundary information, and the final boundary range of the underwater rockfill anti-erosion body in the filling area, the subgrade structure diagram was drawn using engineering drawing software.

[0056] Based on the above embodiments, and based on the subgrade structure diagram, the underwater rockfill anti-erosion body in the filling area is divided into... Each detection unit has the following specific logic:

[0057] Using the subgrade structure diagram as a spatial positioning reference, and combined with the boundary range of the underwater rockfill erosion control body in the filling area, the slope of the erosion control body is divided into multiple graded sections according to the graded boundaries of the sloping normal graded artificial subgrade.

[0058] Within each graded section, fixed-size grids are laid outwards row by row and column by column from the center of the section until the grid coverage exceeds the boundary of the underwater rockfill erosion control body slope in the filling area. The area covered by each grid is recorded as a detection unit.

[0059] After completing the grid division for all graded segments sequentially, all detection units are summarized to obtain... One detection unit;

[0060] The grid size is set to 1m×1m.

[0061] Based on the above, it should be noted that:

[0062] Compared to traditional methods of dividing detection units into overall or random segments, the hierarchical segment grid division method of this application avoids the problem of structural feature confusion caused by dividing detection units across hierarchical segments. Each detection unit corresponds to the slope structure of a single hierarchical segment, which can accurately match the stress and deformation characteristics of different hierarchical segments. This provides a spatial basis for subsequent targeted assignment of location influence coefficients and defect location, and significantly improves the fit between the detection results and the actual engineering structure.

[0063] S2. Collect the measured parameters of each detection unit to construct the measured parameter vector. Subtract the corresponding parameters in the measured parameter vector from the benchmark parameter vector one by one to obtain the slope deviation value, underwater elevation deviation value, and rockfill layer thickness deviation value, so as to accurately reflect the degree of fit between the underwater rockfill anti-erosion body structure and the design form in a quantitative form.

[0064] Based on the above embodiments, the design parameters and measured parameters of each detection unit include slope, underwater elevation and thickness of the riprap layer.

[0065] The definitions and data collection methods for slope, underwater elevation, and riprap layer thickness are as follows:

[0066] Slope refers to the angle of inclination between the slope of the riprap erosion control body and the horizontal plane, reflecting the degree of slope inclination of the graded subgrade bed in the slope normal direction;

[0067] Based on underwater 3D sonar, multibeam echo sounding system or underwater 3D laser scanning equipment, the spatial coordinates of multiple points in the detection unit area are obtained, and the slope is calculated by slope fitting.

[0068] Underwater elevation refers to the elevation value of the surface of the rock-filled erosion barrier below the underwater reference plane, representing the spatial vertical position of the erosion barrier surface;

[0069] Underwater elevation data of measuring points on the surface of the anti-collision body within the detection unit can be directly obtained using underwater sounding equipment, multibeam echo sounding systems, or submersible elevation acquisition devices.

[0070] The thickness of the riprap layer refers to the vertical thickness of the riprap erosion control body from the subgrade slope to the surface of the erosion control body within the corresponding testing unit, reflecting the fullness of the riprap filling and the consistency with the design thickness.

[0071] By combining the original slope elevation of the subgrade with the measured elevation of the erosion control body surface, the thickness of the riprap layer corresponding to each detection unit is calculated through the elevation difference.

[0072] Among them, the slope directly reflects whether the graded structure of the slope normal is formed according to the design, and is a key indicator to ensure the stability of the erosion protection body, preventing slippage and collapse; the underwater elevation reflects whether the overall filling height of the erosion protection body meets the standard, and can determine whether there are quality defects such as missing, insufficient, or local subsidence; the thickness of the riprap layer directly characterizes the compactness and fullness of the riprap filling, and is the core basis for judging the erosion resistance and structural durability of the erosion protection body.

[0073] These three parameters together constitute the quality evaluation system for riprap erosion control structures, which can comprehensively and accurately reflect the consistency between construction and design, thereby enabling the determination of the overall quality status.

[0074] S3. Count the number of non-zero parameters among the slope deviation value, underwater elevation deviation value, and riprap layer thickness deviation value of each testing unit, and then calculate the consistency coefficient corresponding to each testing unit. This achieves a quantitative representation of the overall consistency of the construction quality of multiple indicators of a single testing unit, and intuitively reflects the consistency level between the overall construction quality of the testing unit and the design requirements.

[0075] Based on the above embodiments, for any detection unit, the ratio of the number of parameters with non-zero deviation values ​​to 3 is calculated, and the ratio is subtracted from 1 to obtain the consistency coefficient of the detection unit.

[0076] That is: if the number of parameters with non-zero deviation values ​​in a detection unit is 0, its consistency coefficient is set to 0. ;

[0077] If a detection unit has only one parameter with a non-zero deviation value, its consistency coefficient is set to... ;

[0078] If there are two parameters in a detection unit with non-zero deviation values, its consistency coefficient is set to... ;

[0079] If the number of parameters with non-zero deviation values ​​in a detection unit is 3, its consistency coefficient is set to 1. ;

[0080] Based on the above, it should be noted that:

[0081] The consistency coefficient only reflects the degree of conformity between the construction quality of the testing unit itself and the design requirements, and is not affected by the location of the testing unit. Therefore, it can realize the comparison of the construction quality of different testing units within the same grade section, as well as the horizontal comparison of the construction quality between different grade sections, providing a unified quantitative basis for quickly identifying weak points and weak sections.

[0082] S4. Select detection units with a consistency coefficient less than the consistency coefficient threshold as target detection units. Based on the graded section to which the target detection unit belongs, determine its positional influence coefficient. Combine the consistency coefficient and positional influence coefficient of the target detection unit to determine the overall quality status of the underwater rockfill anti-erosion body in the filling area.

[0083] Based on the above embodiments, detection units with a consistency coefficient less than the consistency coefficient threshold are selected. The specific logic is as follows:

[0084] The consistency coefficient threshold is 1.0;

[0085] The consistency coefficient of each detection unit is compared with the consistency coefficient threshold one by one, and the detection units with a consistency coefficient less than the consistency coefficient threshold are selected as the target detection units.

[0086] Based on the above embodiments, the specific logic for determining the positional influence coefficient of the target detection unit according to the hierarchical segment to which it belongs is as follows:

[0087] The number of graded segments is defined as And number each hierarchical segment in ascending order from bottom to top, that is, number the lowest hierarchical segment as 1, and the highest hierarchical segment as 2. ;

[0088] when When the number is odd, use the number as... The graded sections are designated as the middle section;

[0089] when When the number is even, the graded section closest to the geometric center of the slope is taken as the middle section;

[0090] Set the numbering of the central section to ,and ;

[0091] The positional influence coefficients of all detection units within the same graded section are the same;

[0092] Set the location influence coefficient of the graded segment numbered 1 to... and numbered The influence coefficient of the graded section location is set to , will be numbered The influence coefficient of the graded section location is set to ;

[0093] in, ;

[0094] Based on the above, it should be noted that:

[0095] The slope bottom is the load-bearing base of the entire slope erosion control structure, bearing the self-weight pressure of the overlying soil and riprap. It is also most severely affected by water erosion and washing. Insufficient thickness, elevation deviation, or abnormal slope can easily lead to serious safety hazards such as overall slippage, collapse, and crater expansion. It has the greatest impact on the structural stability of the underwater riprap erosion control structure in the filling area, and therefore is assigned the largest positional influence coefficient. .

[0096] The top of the slope, being the upper boundary, experiences less stress and erosion than the bottom. However, it serves as the constraint and connection point of the erosion control structure. Defects at the top can affect the overall slope alignment, potentially leading to local instability, top collapse, or protection failure. Therefore, its importance surpasses that of the middle section of the slope, hence the location influence coefficient is significant. Less than But greater than .

[0097] The middle section of the slope is the main area of ​​the slope, where the stress is uniform and the water flow conditions are relatively gentle. Even if local parameter deviations occur, the impact on the safety of the underwater rockfill anti-erosion structure in the filling area is less than that at the top and bottom of the slope, and it is less likely to trigger a chain reaction of instability and failure. Therefore, it is assigned the minimum positional influence coefficient. .

[0098] In summary, the order of impact on project safety from highest to lowest is: slope bottom > slope top > slope middle. Therefore, the location influence coefficient is set as follows: .

[0099] Based on the above embodiments, from the first hierarchical segment to the... The location influence coefficient of each of the three graded segments decreases linearly, starting from the first... The first graded section to the first The location influence coefficient of each graded segment increases linearly.

[0100] In the The first graded section to the first Within each graded segment, the location influence coefficient of any graded segment is calculated using the following formula:

[0101]

[0102] in, For the first The location influence coefficient of each graded section For the numbering of the hierarchical sections, ;

[0103] Based on the above embodiments, the position influence coefficient of the corresponding graded segment is retrieved based on the graded segment to which the target detection unit belongs, and used as the position influence coefficient of the target detection unit.

[0104] Based on the above, it should be noted that:

[0105] The structural importance, stress transmission patterns, and scouring effects of underwater rockfill erosion control structures along the slope exhibit continuous, uniform, and gradual engineering characteristics, with no obvious abrupt changes or step-like transitions from the slope bottom to the middle or from the middle to the top. Therefore, this application employs a piecewise linear function to calculate the positional influence coefficient, using linear decrease and linear increase to represent the variation patterns of the positional influence coefficient in two intervals, achieving a one-to-one correspondence between the positional influence coefficient and the graded sections. This piecewise linear function achieves a natural transition between decrease and increase in the middle section, with continuous and smooth coefficient changes, without jumps or abrupt changes. It can accurately reflect the degree of influence of different graded sections on the overall structural safety and stability, highly consistent with the gradual change pattern of slope safety importance, engineering stress characteristics, and hydrodynamic action. Simultaneously, this calculation method avoids evaluation distortion problems caused by coefficient jumps and arbitrary manual assignment, ensuring objective and consistent quantitative results, and providing reasonable and reliable support for subsequent comprehensive evaluation of the overall quality status of the underwater rockfill erosion control structure in the filling area.

[0106] Based on the above embodiments, the consistency coefficient of the target detection unit and its corresponding position influence coefficient are weighted and calculated to obtain the influence score of each target detection unit. The formula used is as follows:

[0107]

[0108] in, For the first The impact score of each target detection unit is used to evaluate the degree of influence of the quality defects of the target detection unit on the stability of the underwater rockfill anti-erosion structure in the filling area, by combining two index parameters: consistency coefficient and location influence coefficient. The smaller the impact score, the smaller the parameter deviation of the target detection unit, the lower the importance of its location, the lower the corresponding safety risk, and the smaller the adverse impact on the stability of the underwater rockfill anti-erosion structure in the filling area.

[0109] In the formula, This is the number of the target detection unit. , The number of target detection units. For the first Position influence coefficient of each target detection unit For the first The consistency coefficient of each target detection unit. ;

[0110] Based on the above, it should be noted that:

[0111] The consistency coefficient is used to reflect the degree of agreement between the measured parameters and the design parameters of the target detection unit, and to reflect the severity of the quality defects of the target detection unit. The smaller the consistency coefficient, the greater the parameter deviation, the more significant the deviation between the construction quality and the design requirements, the higher the degree of quality defects, and the higher the corresponding impact score.

[0112] The location influence coefficient is used to reflect the importance of the slope area where the target detection unit is located to the overall stability of the underwater rock dumping erosion control body, and to reflect the severity of the defects at that location. The smaller the location influence coefficient, the simpler the stress conditions in the area, the milder the water scouring and washing effect, the lower the degree of influence on the overall stability of the underwater rock dumping erosion control body in the filling area, and the lower the safety risk of instability and collapse when defects occur.

[0113] Therefore, the consistency coefficient is negatively correlated with the influence score, while the location influence coefficient is positively correlated with the influence score.

[0114] The location influence coefficient characterizes the importance of the area where the target detection unit is located to the overall structural stability. It is an evaluation index of the spatial importance dimension. The larger the location influence coefficient, the more critical the area, the higher the defect risk, and the stronger the adverse impact on the overall stability of the underwater rockfill erosion control structure in the reclamation area. Therefore, in the comprehensive evaluation, it is treated as a positive contribution item, and the larger its value, the higher the influence score.

[0115] The consistency coefficient characterizes the degree of agreement between measured and design parameters, and is an evaluation index belonging to the quality deviation dimension. A larger consistency coefficient indicates smaller parameter deviations, less severe defects, and a weaker adverse impact on the overall stability of the underwater rock-dumped erosion barrier. Therefore, in the comprehensive evaluation, it is used as a negative adjustment term; a larger value results in a lower impact score.

[0116] In the formula, This is the weighting coefficient for the location influence coefficient. The weighting factor for the consistency coefficient;

[0117] First, the core purpose of this application is to assess the structural stability of underwater rockfill erosion control structures. The core risk of structural instability is not the "size of the deviation" but the "location of the defect"—critical areas such as the bottom and top of the slope are the core of the erosion control structure and the weakest link. Even a small deviation in these areas may disrupt the structural stress balance and directly cause safety accidents such as collapse and instability. On the other hand, in non-critical areas such as the middle of the slope, even if there is a significant deviation, it will only affect the local quality and is unlikely to be transmitted to the whole area to cause overall instability.

[0118] Secondly, from the perspective of the core role of evaluation indicators, the location influence coefficient determines the "hazard level of the defect" and is directly related to the possibility of structural instability. It is the core leading indicator for stability evaluation. The consistency coefficient only reflects the "severity of the defect" and is an auxiliary supplementary indicator. Its influence depends on the importance of the location.

[0119] In summary, to align with the core requirements of "prioritizing risk control in key areas and accurately assessing structural stability," a higher weighting coefficient is assigned to the location influence coefficient, i.e., in... In this case, let .

[0120] As one implementation method, The value range is an open interval of 0.5-1.0. The value range is an open interval of 0-0.5. The specific value is set by technical personnel according to the actual situation and is not restricted here.

[0121] Based on the above embodiments, the influence scores of all target detection units are summed to obtain the comprehensive influence score of the underwater rock-fill anti-erosion body in the filling area. The formula used is as follows:

[0122]

[0123] The calculated overall impact score is compared with the preset passing threshold:

[0124] If the comprehensive impact score of the underwater rock dumping anti-erosion body in the filling area is less than or equal to the preset qualified threshold, it means that its risk is within a safe and controllable range, and its overall quality is judged to be qualified.

[0125] If the comprehensive impact score of the underwater rockfill anti-erosion body in the filling area is greater than the preset qualified threshold, it means that its risk exceeds the allowable range and the structural stability cannot be guaranteed. Therefore, its overall quality is judged to be unqualified.

[0126] The preset qualified threshold is determined based on historical engineering data: first, a comprehensive influence score benchmark value is determined based on the test results of similar qualified underwater rock-throwing anti-erosion bodies, and then the benchmark value is increased by 20% to obtain the preset qualified threshold value.

[0127] Based on the above, it should be noted that:

[0128] This invention fully integrates the slope structure characteristics and spatial stress differences of underwater rockfill erosion control bodies in the filling area, and organically couples construction quality deviations with the importance of slope location. It not only realizes the quality differentiation and quantification of detection units in different spatial locations, but also comprehensively assesses the overall structural stability risk from a holistic perspective, thereby improving the comprehensiveness, pertinence and accuracy of the construction quality evaluation of underwater rockfill erosion control bodies.

[0129] The above formulas are all dimensionless calculations. The formulas are derived from software simulations based on a large amount of collected data to obtain the most recent real-world results. The preset parameters in the formulas are set by those skilled in the art according to the actual situation.

[0130] The above embodiments can be implemented, in whole or in part, by software, hardware, firmware, or any other combination thereof. When implemented in software, the above embodiments can be implemented, in whole or in part, as a computer program product. Those skilled in the art will recognize that the units and algorithm steps of the various examples described in conjunction with the embodiments disclosed herein can be implemented by software, electronic hardware, or a combination of computer software and electronic hardware. Whether these functions are implemented in hardware or software depends on the specific application and design constraints of the technical solution.

[0131] The units described as separate components may or may not be physically separate. The components shown as units may or may not be physical units; they may be located in one place or distributed across multiple network units. Some or all of the units can be selected to achieve the purpose of this embodiment, depending on actual needs.

[0132] The above description is merely a specific embodiment of this application, but the scope of protection of this application is not limited thereto. Any changes or substitutions that can be easily conceived by those skilled in the art within the scope of the technology disclosed in this application should be included within the scope of protection of this application.

Claims

1. A method for quality testing of underwater rockfill anti-erosion bodies in sloping, normal-graded artificial subgrade filling areas, characterized in that, The specific steps include: S1. Based on the plane coordinates of the sloping normal graded artificial subgrade and the boundary range of the underwater rockfill erosion control body in the filling area, draw the subgrade structure diagram, and divide the underwater rockfill erosion control body in the filling area into M detection units, determine the graded section to which each detection unit belongs, and obtain the design parameters corresponding to each detection unit to construct its reference parameter vector. S2. Collect the measured parameters of each detection unit to construct the measured parameter vector, and subtract the corresponding parameters in the measured parameter vector from the benchmark parameter vector one by one to obtain the slope deviation value, underwater elevation deviation value, and riprap layer thickness deviation value respectively. S3. Count the number of non-zero parameters among the slope deviation value, underwater elevation deviation value, and riprap layer thickness deviation value of each detection unit, and then calculate the consistency coefficient corresponding to each detection unit. S4. Select detection units with a consistency coefficient less than the consistency coefficient threshold as target detection units. Based on the graded section to which the target detection unit belongs, determine its positional influence coefficient. Combine the consistency coefficient and positional influence coefficient of the target detection unit to determine the overall quality status of the underwater rockfill anti-erosion body in the filling area.

2. The method for quality testing of underwater rockfill anti-erosion bodies in slope-type normal graded artificial subgrade filling areas according to claim 1, characterized in that, The design parameters and measured parameters of each detection unit include slope, underwater elevation, and thickness of the riprap layer.

3. The method for quality testing of underwater rockfill anti-erosion bodies in slope-type normal graded artificial subgrade filling areas according to claim 2, characterized in that, Based on the subgrade structure diagram, the underwater rockfill anti-erosion body in the reclamation area is divided into: Each detection unit has the following specific logic: Using the subgrade structure diagram as a spatial positioning reference, and combined with the boundary range of the underwater rockfill erosion control body in the filling area, the slope of the erosion control body is divided into multiple graded sections according to the graded boundaries of the sloping normal graded artificial subgrade. Within each graded section, fixed-size grids are laid outwards row by row and column by column from the center of the section until the grid coverage exceeds the boundary of the underwater rockfill erosion control body slope in the filling area. The area covered by each grid is recorded as a detection unit. After completing the grid division for all graded segments sequentially, all detection units are summarized to obtain... One detection unit.

4. The method for quality testing of underwater rockfill anti-erosion bodies in sloping, normal-graded artificial subgrade filling areas according to claim 3, characterized in that, For any detection unit, calculate the ratio of the number of parameters with non-zero deviation values ​​to 3, and subtract this ratio from 1 to obtain the consistency coefficient of the detection unit.

5. The method for quality testing of underwater rockfill anti-erosion bodies in sloping, normal-graded artificial subgrade filling areas according to claim 4, characterized in that, The detection units with a consistency coefficient less than the consistency coefficient threshold are selected, and the specific logic is as follows: Set the consistency coefficient threshold to 1.0; The consistency coefficient of each detection unit is compared with the consistency coefficient threshold one by one, and the detection units with a consistency coefficient less than the consistency coefficient threshold are selected as the target detection units.

6. The method for quality testing of underwater rockfill anti-erosion bodies in sloping, normal-graded artificial subgrade filling areas according to claim 5, characterized in that, The specific logic for determining the positional influence coefficient based on the hierarchical segment to which the target detection unit belongs is as follows: The number of graded segments is defined as And number each hierarchical segment in ascending order from bottom to top, that is, number the lowest hierarchical segment as 1, and the highest hierarchical segment as 2. ; when When the number is odd, use the number as... The graded sections are designated as the middle section; when When the number is even, the graded section closest to the geometric center of the slope is taken as the middle section; Set the numbering of the central section to ,and ; The positional influence coefficients of all detection units within the same graded section are the same; Set the location influence coefficient of the graded segment numbered 1 to... and numbered The influence coefficient of the graded section location is set to , will be numbered The influence coefficient of the graded section location is set to ; in, ; From the first graded segment to the... The location influence coefficient of each graded segment decreases linearly: The positional influence coefficient of any graded segment is first calculated by comparing the first graded segment with the second graded segment. The difference in the positional influence coefficient of each graded segment is then divided by the difference between the first graded segment and the second graded segment. The number of intervals between each graded segment is used to obtain the decrease of a unit graded segment. The decrease of a unit graded segment is multiplied by the difference in number between the graded segment and the first graded segment to obtain the cumulative decrease of the graded segment. Finally, the cumulative decrease is subtracted from the position influence coefficient of the first graded segment to obtain the position influence coefficient of the graded segment. From the The first graded section to the first The location influence coefficient of each graded segment increases linearly: The location influence coefficient of any graded segment is first calculated. The first graded section and the first The difference in the location influence coefficient of each graded segment, divided by the first... The first graded section and the first The interval between the segments of the first hierarchical segment is used to obtain the increment of the unit hierarchical segment. This increment of the unit hierarchical segment is then multiplied by the sum of the intervals of the first hierarchical segment and the second hierarchical segment. The cumulative increment of a given hierarchical segment is obtained by calculating the difference in the segment numbers. Finally, the increment is calculated using the number of segments. The positional influence coefficient of a graded segment plus the cumulative increment is the positional influence coefficient of that graded segment. Based on the hierarchical segment to which the target detection unit belongs, the positional influence coefficient of the corresponding hierarchical segment is retrieved and used as the positional influence coefficient of the target detection unit.

7. The method for quality testing of underwater rockfill anti-erosion bodies in sloping, normal-graded artificial subgrade filling areas according to claim 6, characterized in that, By combining the consistency coefficient of the target detection unit with the influence coefficient of the corresponding location, the overall quality status of the underwater rockfill anti-erosion body in the filling area is determined. The specific logic is as follows: The consistency coefficient of the target detection unit is weighted and calculated with its corresponding position influence coefficient to obtain the influence score of each target detection unit. The comprehensive impact score of the underwater rock dumping anti-erosion body in the dumping area is obtained by summing the impact scores of all target detection units. The calculated overall impact score is compared with the preset passing threshold: If the comprehensive impact score of the underwater rock dumping anti-erosion body in the filling area is less than or equal to the preset qualified threshold, then the overall quality of the area is judged to be qualified. If the overall impact score of the underwater rockfill anti-erosion body in the filling area is greater than the preset qualified threshold, then the overall quality of the area is judged to be unqualified.

Images