A mountainous highway key infrastructure structure point passage risk assessment method

Abstract

This invention belongs to the field of highway safety management and risk assessment technology, and discloses a method for assessing the traffic risk of key infrastructure structural points on mountainous highways. The method includes the following steps: S1. Acquiring multi-source data for the target structural point, including natural disaster data, technical condition data, road alignment data, meteorological data, traffic flow data, and special control measures data; S2. Determining the basic risk value for classification and grading of the structural point based on the natural disaster data and technical condition data through a risk assessment matrix; S3. Calculating the basic risk value of the structural point's alignment characteristics based on the road alignment data; S4. Determining dynamic risk adjustment coefficients based on meteorological data and traffic flow data; S5. Determining additional risk correction coefficients based on special control measures data; S6. Calculating the traffic risk value of the target structural point. This invention achieves quantitative assessment and classification of the traffic risk of structural points, providing a scientific basis for monitoring, early warning, and special rectification of high-risk locations.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of highway safety management and risk assessment technology, specifically involving a method for assessing the traffic risk of key infrastructure structural points on mountain highways. It mainly targets key infrastructure structural points such as bridges, tunnels, slopes, and roadbeds and pavements that are highly susceptible to geological disasters. The aim is to quantitatively assess the traffic risks caused by multiple factors such as natural disasters, topography, road infrastructure technical conditions, meteorological conditions, and traffic flow along mountain highways, supporting a comprehensive assessment of highway operation safety. Background Technology

[0002] Due to complex geological conditions and frequent extreme weather events, the operation of mountain highways faces multiple risks, including geological disasters, floods, deterioration of road infrastructure, and unforeseen incidents, posing severe challenges to driving safety, smooth traffic flow, road network resilience, and management efficiency. Ensuring the rationality of the quantitative analysis of various factors affecting traffic risks is a major challenge.

[0003] In existing technologies, patent CN118211176B proposes a method for assessing highway traffic accident risks by integrating multi-source data. However, its focus is on the data level and technical implementation, weakening the consideration of the systematic nature of the risk assessment indicator system and the interaction between various factors. The paper "Research on Machine Learning Optimization Algorithm for Slope Stability Evaluation of Mountain Highways" deeply analyzes the coupling relationship and action chain between different factors, but the model is too complex, the relevant data is difficult to obtain, and it is difficult to directly apply to operation management, lacking engineering practicality and scalability. After reviewing relevant standards and specifications, it was found that at the engineering practice level, the risk assessment of traffic at structural points on mountain highways currently mainly refers to specifications such as the "Technical Standard for Highway Engineering" (JTG B01) and the "Design Specification for Highway Traffic Safety Facilities" (JTG D81). For example, JTG B01 focuses on defining basic risk factors such as road alignment and technical conditions; JTG D81 covers safety facility requirements and involves some specific control measures; the "Technical Guidelines for Comprehensive Risk Assessment of Highway Disaster-Bearing Bodies" focuses on quantifying natural disaster risks; and the "Guidelines for Traffic Safety Risk Assessment of Expressways" (DB14T+2468) does not consider the impact of natural disaster risks. These standards operate independently in practice, failing to systematically integrate basic risks (such as natural disasters and technical conditions), dynamic risks (such as weather and traffic flow), and specific control measures. This results in risk assessments often focusing on a single dimension in practical applications, lacking analysis of multi-factor synergistic mechanisms, and failing to comprehensively reflect the comprehensiveness and dynamism of traffic risks at structural points, thus limiting the scientific validity and effectiveness of control decisions. Summary of the Invention

[0004] In view of this, the purpose of this invention is to provide a method for assessing the traffic risk of key infrastructure structural points on mountain highways. By integrating basic risks, dynamic risks, and special control factors, the method achieves quantitative assessment and classification of traffic risks at structural points, providing a scientific basis for monitoring, early warning, and special rectification of high-risk locations.

[0005] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention adopts the following technical solution:

[0006] A method for assessing traffic risk at key infrastructure structural points on mountain highways includes the following steps:

[0007] S1. Obtain multi-source data of the target structural points;

[0008] The multi-source data for the target structure points include natural disaster data, technical condition data, road alignment data, meteorological data, traffic flow data, and special control measures data;

[0009] S2. Based on the natural disaster data and technical condition data, determine the basic risk values ​​for the classification and grading of structural points using a predefined risk assessment matrix;

[0010] S3. Based on the road alignment data, calculate the basic risk value of the alignment features of the structural points;

[0011] S4. Based on the meteorological data and traffic flow data, determine the dynamic risk adjustment coefficients respectively;

[0012] S5. Based on the data from the aforementioned special control measures, determine the additional risk correction coefficient;

[0013] S6. Based on the basic risk value of the classification and grading, the basic risk value of the linear feature, the dynamic risk adjustment coefficient, and the additional risk correction coefficient, calculate the passage risk value of the target structural point according to the formula of "basic risk superposition, adjustment coefficient and correction coefficient multiplication".

[0014] Furthermore, step S2 includes the following sub-steps:

[0015] S2.1 Calculate the natural disaster risk index of the structural points;

[0016] Natural disasters include landslides, mudslides, water damage, subsidence, and collapse;

[0017] The formula for calculating the Structural Point Natural Disaster Risk Index (CRI) is as follows:

[0018]

[0019] In the formula, A is the score for the frequency of disaster occurrence; B is the score for the historical severity of disaster; C is the score for the disaster response; D is the score for the degree of disaster development; and E is the score for the highway importance index. These are the weighting coefficients for each indicator;

[0020] S2.2 Based on the calculated CRI score, classify the natural disaster risk level of the structural points;

[0021] The natural disaster risk level is Level 1: >83;

[0022] The natural disaster risk level is Level II: 83≥ >62;

[0023] The natural disaster risk level is Level III: 62≥ >48;

[0024] The natural disaster risk level is level four: ≤48;

[0025] S2.3 Assess the technical condition level of structural points;

[0026] I. Based on the type of structural points, adopt the corresponding industry standards and procedures to conduct a quantitative assessment of the technical condition;

[0027] The types of structural points include roadbed and pavement, slopes, tunnels, and bridges;

[0028] The comprehensive subgrade technical condition index (SCI) and pavement technical condition index (PQI) are used for evaluation. The pavement technical condition index (PQI) is calculated by weighting pavement damage index (PCI), smoothness index (RQI), rutting index (RDI), and skid resistance index (SRI).

[0029] The slope was assessed using the Subgrade Technical Condition Index (SCI).

[0030] The final evaluation output, which includes the tunnel's integrated civil engineering structure, electromechanical facilities, and other structures, takes the maximum value as the overall technical condition assessment result.

[0031] The bridge assessment follows a hierarchical system of "component-part-structure-overall", and the technical condition score is calculated based on the deduction value of each component.

[0032] For bridges and tunnels, a "one-vote veto" judgment rule is introduced, that is, when a bridge or tunnel has serious defects, it will be directly judged as Category 5.

[0033] II. Standardize the classification of the technical condition of each structural point;

[0034] If the technical condition of a structural point is excellent, it is classified into category 1; if the technical condition of a structural point is good, it is classified into category 2; if the technical condition of a structural point is average, it is classified into category 3; if the technical condition of a structural point is subpar, it is classified into category 4; and if the technical condition of a structural point is poor, it is classified into category 5.

[0035] S2.4 combines the obtained natural disaster risk level with the technical condition level, and determines the final comprehensive risk level of the structural point based on the risk assessment matrix;

[0036] The final comprehensive risk level, i.e., the structural point classification and grading index, is... express;

[0037] The final output of the structural point classification and grading index is divided into four levels: Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, and Level 4.

[0038] The final judgment logic of the structural point classification and grading index is as follows: if the technical condition level of the structural point is rated as Class 4 or Class 5, then regardless of the level of its natural disaster risk, the structural point classification and grading index is uniformly judged as Level 1; if the technical condition level is Class 1 to Class 3, then a step-by-step judgment is made according to the severity of the natural disaster risk.

[0039] Among them, the structural point classification and grading index is Level 1, corresponding to the initial risk value. The initial risk value is 83; the structural point classification and grading index is level two, corresponding to an initial risk value of 83. The value is 72; the structural point classification and grading index is level three, corresponding to an initial risk value of 72. The initial risk value is 55; the structural point classification and grading index is level four, corresponding to an initial risk value of 55. It is 48.

[0040] Furthermore, the specific content of step S3 is as follows:

[0041] I. Based on the "Guidelines for Risk Assessment of Highway Traffic Safety", determine the indicators in the road alignment data that can be included in the "risk range", including: the radius of the circular curve of the road, the longitudinal slope angle, whether there is a continuous long steep downhill slope, the roadside parking sight distance and the central median parking sight distance, the net distance between the tunnel exit and the main line exit ahead and the net distance between the main line entrance and the tunnel entrance ahead, whether there is a main line diversion section, the alignment index of the main line entrance and exit section, and the ramp alignment index.

[0042] II. Quantify the indicators included in the "risk range" in the road alignment data. The quantified value is used as the initial risk value for the road alignment. express.

[0043] Furthermore, the specific content of step S4 is as follows:

[0044] Based on the "Highway Engineering Technical Standards" and the "Guidelines for Traffic Safety Risk Assessment of Expressways," indicators from meteorological and traffic flow data that can be included in the "risk range" are determined. These indicators are then quantified, and the quantified values ​​are used as adjustment coefficients. express;

[0045] The meteorological data indicators include dense fog, water accumulation, icing, crosswinds, and rainfall;

[0046] Traffic flow data indicators include average daily peak hour congestion, proportion of large vehicles, operating speed, and average daily peak hour vehicle speed dispersion.

[0047] Furthermore, the specific content of step S5 is as follows:

[0048] The various indicators in the special control measures are quantified, and their quantified values ​​are used as correction coefficients. express;

[0049] The specific control measures correspond to the basic risk / dynamic risk factors. The specific control factor is only included in the assessment and calculation when the corresponding basic risk / dynamic risk is included in the risk level calculation.

[0050] The indicators for the specific control measures data include infrastructure control measures and traffic flow control measures;

[0051] Infrastructure control measures include: adding section speed measurement devices, emergency escape lanes, cooling pools, and parking areas; adding sight guidance devices; adding electronic warning devices at tunnel entrances and interchanges; installing driving safety warning devices and driving safety guidance devices on road sections affected by fog; adding drainage devices on road sections affected by water accumulation; installing icing warning devices and automatic icing handling devices on road sections affected by icing; installing crosswind warning devices on road sections affected by crosswinds; and appropriately adding guardrails to overpasses / road sections near cliffs or water.

[0052] Traffic flow control measures: Restricting, monitoring, and guiding key vehicles; implementing special control measures for overpasses and sections of road adjacent to cliffs and water.

[0053] Furthermore, step S6 includes the following sub-steps:

[0054] S6.1 Attribution calculation of basic risk indicators;

[0055]

[0056] In the formula, The risk contribution of the i-th basic risk indicator included in the assessment; n is the total number of basic risk indicators included in the assessment;

[0057] S6.2 Attribution calculation of dynamic risk indicators;

[0058]

[0059] In the formula, The risk contribution of the j-th dynamic risk indicator included in the assessment; m is the total number of dynamic risk indicators included in the assessment;

[0060] S6.3 Calculate the passage risk value of the structural point;

[0061]

[0062] In the formula, The passage risk value represents the assessed structural point. This serves as a baseline for background risk, to avoid situations where the risk value is 0. represents the quantified risk value of the i-th basic risk indicator; n represents the total number of basic risk indicators included in the assessment; m represents the total number of dynamic risk indicators included in the assessment; s represents the total number of special control indicators included in the assessment.

[0063] in, The calculation expression is:

[0064]

[0065] In the calculation, firstly based on The basic risk indicators are sorted from highest to lowest; after sorting, Let i be the initial risk value of the i-th basic risk indicator; the design logic of this formula is: the first basic risk indicator, i.e., the indicator with the highest risk contribution. Take directly The value, subsequently Allocation is based on the remaining risk capacity and is carried out proportionally.

[0066] S6.4 Determine the risk level of passage at structural points;

[0067] when When the value is greater than 100, the risk level is Level 1, which is a major risk, and the acceptance level is unacceptable.

[0068] When 80 < When the value is ≤100, the risk level is Level 2, which is relatively high risk, and the acceptance level is not desirable.

[0069] When 60 < When the risk level is ≤80, the risk level is Level 3, which is considered moderate risk, and the acceptance level is acceptable.

[0070] when When the value is ≤60, the risk level is level four, which is low risk, and the acceptance level is acceptable.

[0071] Beneficial effects:

[0072] 1. By integrating basic risks, dynamic risks, and special controls across multiple dimensions, the risk of passage through structural points has been fully quantified, overcoming the limitations of isolated factor assessment in existing standards.

[0073] 2. Based on the actual needs of highway operation and management, the indicator system is compatible with industry standards, the calculation formula is simple, and it is easy to integrate into the existing highway management system.

[0074] Other advantages, objectives, and features of the invention will be set forth in part in the description which follows, and in part will be apparent to those skilled in the art from the following examination, or may be learned from practice of the invention. The objectives and other advantages of the invention can be realized and obtained through the following description. Attached Figure Description

[0075] Figure 1 A logic diagram of factors influencing the risk of passage through structural points;

[0076] Figure 2 A flowchart for quantitative assessment of the risks of passage through structural points. Detailed Implementation

[0077] To make the technical solutions, advantages, and objectives 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, not all, of the embodiments of the present invention. All other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art based on the described embodiments of the present invention without creative effort are within the protection scope of this application.

[0078] like Figure 1 and Figure 2 As shown, this invention provides a method for assessing traffic risk at key infrastructure structural points on mountain highways, comprising the following steps:

[0079] Step 1: Obtain multi-source data for the target structural points, including natural disaster data, technical condition data, road alignment data, meteorological data, traffic flow data, and specific control measures data. The indicator system considered for multi-source data selection is determined as follows;

[0080] Based on standards such as the *Highway Engineering Technical Standards* (JTG B01), *Highway Traffic Safety Facilities Design Specifications* (JTG D81), *Guidelines for Traffic Safety Risk Assessment of Expressways* (DB14T+2468), and *Technical Guidelines for Comprehensive Survey of Highway Disaster-Bearing Bodies under Natural Disaster Risk*, this analysis uses a classification framework of "basic risk - dynamic risk - additional risk" to identify factors affecting the traffic risk at structural points on mountainous expressways. These factors include basic risk, dynamic risk, and specific control measures. Basic risk factors include natural disaster risks at structural points (such as landslides, collapses, debris flows, and water damage), technical conditions, and road structural characteristics (such as circular curves, longitudinal slopes, mainline entrances and exits, and the alignment or sight distance of ramps), reflecting the inherent risks of structural points. Dynamic risk factors include meteorological conditions and traffic flow status, reflecting the amplifying effect of external environmental factors on basic risks. Their mechanism lies in the fact that dynamic risk factors increase the probability of risk events or amplify their consequences. For example, fog, icing, and crosswinds significantly reduce the road surface adhesion coefficient or visibility, increasing the accident rate on small-radius curves under icy conditions. Specific control factors reflect the proactive mitigation effect of control measures on risks, that is, reducing the probability or consequences of risks through engineering or management means. (See diagram below.) Figure 1 As shown in Tables 1-3, based on the analysis of the factors affecting traffic risk at structural points above, a traffic risk assessment index system for structural points on mountainous expressways and its reference standards are constructed.

[0081] Table 1 Basic Risk Indicators and Reference Standards

[0082]

[0083] Table 2 Dynamic Risk Indicators and Reference Standards

[0084]

[0085] Table 3. Specific Control Indicators and Reference Standards

[0086]

[0087] Step 2: Based on the natural disaster data and technical condition data, determine the basic risk values ​​for the classification and grading of structural points using a predefined risk assessment matrix;

[0088] The natural disaster risk indicators and technical condition indicators of structural points are integrated into a classification and grading index, which, together with various indicators of road structural characteristics, participate in the calculation of risk values. The structural point risk classification and grading index value is obtained by combining the structural point natural disaster risk comprehensive index (CRI) and the structural point technical condition value. The natural disaster risk index (CRI) is a comprehensive quantitative index used to assess the probability of disaster occurrence and the potential losses caused by a disaster. Factors affecting this index include the frequency of natural disasters, the historical severity of disasters, disaster response status, road importance, and the degree of disaster development. The calculation of CRI requires assigning values ​​to each indicator and weight coefficient of each influencing factor according to the assignment standards of the "Technical Guidelines for Comprehensive Risk Assessment of Highway Disaster-Bearing Bodies," and then calculating according to the formula:

[0089]

[0090] In the formula, A is the score for the frequency of disaster occurrence; B is the score for the historical severity of disaster; C is the score for the disaster response; D is the score for the degree of disaster development; and E is the score for the highway importance index. These are the weighting coefficients for each indicator;

[0091] However, the definition of disaster risk classification is shown in Table 4:

[0092] Table 4. Standards for Classifying Natural Disaster Risks

[0093]

[0094] The technical condition values ​​of different structural points are calculated based on the evaluation system established by national standards and industry standards such as the "Highway Technical Condition Evaluation Standard" (JTG 5210), "Highway Bridge Technical Condition Evaluation Standard" (JTG / T H21), and "Highway Maintenance Technical Specification" (JTGH10).

[0095] Assess the technical condition level of structural points:

[0096] I. Based on the type of structural points, adopt the corresponding industry standards and procedures to conduct a quantitative assessment of the technical condition;

[0097] The types of structural points include roadbed and pavement, slopes, tunnels, and bridges;

[0098] The comprehensive subgrade technical condition index (SCI) and pavement technical condition index (PQI) are used for evaluation. The pavement technical condition index (PQI) is calculated by weighting pavement damage index (PCI), smoothness index (RQI), rutting index (RDI), and skid resistance index (SRI).

[0099] The slope was assessed using the Subgrade Technical Condition Index (SCI).

[0100] The final evaluation output, which includes the tunnel's integrated civil engineering structure, electromechanical facilities, and other structures, takes the maximum value as the overall technical condition assessment result.

[0101] The bridge assessment follows a hierarchical system of "component-part-structure-overall", and the technical condition score is calculated based on the deduction value of each component.

[0102] For bridges and tunnels, a "one-vote veto" judgment rule is introduced, that is, when a bridge or tunnel has serious defects, it will be directly judged as Category 5.

[0103] II. Standardize the classification of the technical condition of each structural point;

[0104] If the technical condition of a structural point is excellent, it is classified into category 1; if the technical condition of a structural point is good, it is classified into category 2; if the technical condition of a structural point is medium, it is classified into category 3; if the technical condition of a structural point is subpar, it is classified into category 4; and if the technical condition of a structural point is poor, it is classified into category 5.

[0105] Based on the comprehensive classification of natural disaster risks and the classification of technical conditions, the evaluation criteria for the classification of structural points are shown in Table 5.

[0106] Table 5 Risk Classification and Grading Assessment of Structural Points

[0107]

[0108] Structural point classification and grading index values ​​are used The values ​​are indicated. The assignment is based on the "Technical Guidelines for Comprehensive Risk Assessment of Highway Disaster-Bearing Bodies," as shown in Table 6.

[0109] Table 6. Classification and Grading of Structural Points

[0110]

[0111] Step 3: Based on the road alignment data, calculate the basic risk value of the alignment features of the structural points;

[0112] First, the criteria for including each indicator in the assessment must be clarified. Only indicators whose values ​​fall within the "risk range" are meaningful for risk attribution and risk value calculation. For road alignment data in the basic risk assessment, the scope of inclusion is referenced in the "Guidelines for Highway Traffic Safety Risk Assessment" (DB14T+2468), as shown in Table 1. Second, the quantitative standards for each road alignment indicator need to be defined. The quantitative value is the initial risk value of the road alignment, using... This indicates that the quantitative reference is the "Guidelines for Highway Traffic Safety Risk Assessment" (DB14T+2468).

[0113] Step 4: Based on the meteorological data and traffic flow data, determine the dynamic risk adjustment coefficients respectively;

[0114] The quantitative values ​​of the various indicators in dynamic risk are adjustment coefficients, used as... The scope and quantitative values ​​included in the assessment refer to the "Technical Standards for Highway Engineering" (JTG B01) and the "Guidelines for Traffic Safety Risk Assessment of Expressways" (DB14T+2468), as shown in Table 2.

[0115] Step 5: Based on the data from the aforementioned special control measures, determine the additional risk correction coefficient;

[0116] The quantitative values ​​of each indicator in the special control program are adjusted using correction coefficients. This indicates that specific control measures correspond to basic / dynamic risk factors. A specific control factor is only included in the assessment and calculation when the corresponding basic / dynamic risk is included in the risk level calculation. Its quantitative values ​​are referenced in the "Design Specifications for Highway Traffic Safety Facilities" (JTGD81) and the "Guidelines for Risk Assessment of Expressway Traffic Safety" (DB14T+2468), as shown in Table 3.

[0117] Step 6: Based on the basic risk value of the classification and grading, the basic risk value of the linear feature, the dynamic risk adjustment coefficient, and the additional risk correction coefficient, calculate the passage risk value of the target structural point according to the formula of "basic risk superposition, adjustment coefficient and correction coefficient multiplication".

[0118] Based on the indicator system shown in Tables 1-3, a process for quantifying the passage risk at structural points is constructed as follows: Figure 2 As shown, the risk value calculation consists of two parts: first, attributing the key factors that cause risk, and second, obtaining a quantified total risk value.

[0119] The attribution calculation formula for the basic risk indicators is as follows:

[0120]

[0121] In the formula, Let be the risk contribution of the i-th basic risk indicator included in the assessment; n is the total number of basic risk indicators included in the assessment; the purpose of attributing basic risk indicators is to calculate the proportion of the risk value contributed by the current indicator in the sum of the risk values ​​of all indicators. The higher the proportion, the greater the contribution of the indicator to the basic risk of the structural point.

[0122] The attribution calculation formula for dynamic risk indicators is as follows:

[0123]

[0124] In the formula, Let be the risk contribution of the j-th dynamic risk indicator included in the assessment; m be the total number of dynamic risk indicators included in the assessment; the purpose of attributing dynamic risk indicators is to calculate the proportion of the risk correction value contributed by the current indicator in the product of the risk correction values ​​of all indicators. The higher the proportion, the greater the contribution of the indicator to the dynamic risk of the structural point.

[0125] The formula for calculating the passage risk value P at the structural point is as follows:

[0126]

[0127] In the formula, The passage risk value represents the assessed structural point. This serves as the baseline for background risk, and its purpose is to avoid a risk value of 0. Referring to the "Guidelines for Traffic Safety Risk Assessment on Highways," the value is generally set at 5.0 for mountainous highways. denoted as the quantified risk value of the i-th basic risk indicator; n represents the total number of basic risk indicators included in the assessment; m represents the total number of dynamic risk indicators included in the assessment; and s represents the total number of special control indicators included in the assessment. Let i be the risk quantification value of the i-th basic risk indicator. is the total basic risk value at this structural point. The addition reflects the cumulative effect of basic risks.

[0128] In the process of calculating the basic risk value, in order to obtain an overall basic risk value within the range of [0,100] and avoid excessive inflation of the value when multiple factors are superimposed, The calculation formula is as follows:

[0129]

[0130] In the calculation, firstly based on Sort the indicators from highest to lowest. After sorting, Let be the initial risk value of the i-th basic risk indicator. The design logic of this formula is: the first basic risk indicator, i.e., the indicator with the highest risk contribution. Take directly The value, subsequently The remaining risk capacity (100 - the allocated risk value) is allocated proportionally.

[0131] Risk levels for passage at structural points:

[0132] The passage risk level of the structural point is divided into four levels: Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, and Level 4, with Level 4 being low risk and Level 1 being high risk. Based on the structural point risk value P and referring to Table 7, the passage risk of this structural point is assessed.

[0133] Table 7 Classification of Risk Levels for Structural Points

[0134]

[0135] According to the "Guidelines for Traffic Safety Risk Assessment on Highways", when some evaluation index values ​​reach the following conditions, they are directly judged as Level 1 risk, as detailed in Table 8.

[0136] Table 8. Direct Judgment Criteria for Level 1 (Major Risk)

[0137]

[0138] Example 1

[0139] Taking the 1268.92-kilometer Chongqing mountain expressway network in southeastern and northeastern Chongqing, operated by Chongqing Expressway Group Road Network Company, as a scenario, and using the traffic risk assessment in August and September 2025 as an example, this paper introduces the specific calculation method of the traffic risk value of structural points:

[0140] Basic risk value calculation: Based on the basic information table of structural point monitoring, all structural points to be assessed are sorted out and differentiated into upstream and downstream categories. Combining relevant data such as the natural disaster risk level and technical condition of the structural points, the upstream and downstream classification and grading levels of each structural point are calculated using the classification and grading index fusion calculation method proposed in step 3. The basic risk values ​​of some typical points are shown in Table 9:

[0141] Table 9. Basic Risk Values ​​of Some Structural Points

[0142]

[0143] Dynamic risk adjustment coefficient calculation: First, the meteorological adjustment coefficient. Based on the meteorological warning data of highway risk points in August and September, the number of meteorological warnings for each assessed structural point was calculated, and the meteorological adjustment coefficient was assigned a value based on the overall frequency of adverse weather events. The warning frequencies for some structural points after processing are shown in Table 10:

[0144] Table 10 Meteorological data for some structural points

[0145]

[0146] Secondly, there is the traffic flow adjustment coefficient. Based on the gantry traffic flow data, the average daily peak hour congestion, the average daily proportion of large vehicles, and the average daily peak hour vehicle speed dispersion recorded by each gantry are calculated, and the traffic flow dynamic adjustment coefficient is assigned. The processed data of some gantry are summarized in Table 11.

[0147] Table 11 Partial Gantry Traffic Flow Processing Data

[0148]

[0149] Traffic risk assessment at structural points: By mapping the gantry to nearby structural points, the traffic flow adjustment coefficient value for each structural point can be obtained. This coefficient is then superimposed on the dynamic adjustment coefficient and adjusted according to specific control measures to calculate the traffic risk value and its level for each structural point. The assessment results for some typical structural points are shown in Table 12 below.

[0150] Table 12. Risk Assessment Results for Some Structural Points

[0151]

[0152] It is hereby declared that the above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of the present invention and are not intended to limit it. Although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to preferred embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that modifications or equivalent substitutions can be made to the technical solutions of the present invention without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention, and all such modifications or substitutions should be covered within the scope of the claims of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for assessing traffic risk at key infrastructure structural points on mountainous expressways, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: S1. Obtain multi-source data of the target structural points; The multi-source data for the target structural points includes natural disaster data, technical condition data, road alignment data, meteorological data, traffic flow data, and special control measures data; S2. Based on the natural disaster data and technical condition data, determine the basic risk values ​​for the classification and grading of structural points using a predefined risk assessment matrix; S3. Based on the road alignment data, calculate the basic risk value of the alignment features of the structural points; S4. Based on the meteorological data and traffic flow data, determine the dynamic risk adjustment coefficients respectively; S5. Based on the data from the aforementioned special control measures, determine the additional risk correction coefficient; S6. Based on the basic risk value of the classification and grading, the basic risk value of the linear feature, the dynamic risk adjustment coefficient, and the additional risk correction coefficient, calculate the passage risk value of the target structural point according to the formula of "basic risk superposition, adjustment coefficient and correction coefficient multiplication".

2. The method for assessing traffic risk at key infrastructure structural points on mountain highways according to claim 1, characterized in that, Step S2 includes the following sub-steps: S2.1 Calculate the natural disaster risk index of the structural points; Natural disasters include landslides, mudslides, water damage, subsidence, and collapse; The formula for calculating the Structural Point Natural Disaster Risk Index (CRI) is as follows: In the formula, A is the score for the frequency of disaster occurrence; B is the score for the historical severity of disaster; C is the score for the disaster response; D is the score for the degree of disaster development; and E is the score for the highway importance index. These are the weighting coefficients for each indicator; S2.2 Based on the calculated CRI score, classify the natural disaster risk level of the structural points; The natural disaster risk level is Level 1: >83; The natural disaster risk level is Level II: 83≥ >62; The natural disaster risk level is Level III: 62≥ >48; The natural disaster risk level is level four: ≤48; S2.3 Assess the technical condition level of structural points; I. Based on the type of structural points, adopt the corresponding industry standards and procedures to conduct a quantitative assessment of the technical condition; The types of structural points include roadbed and pavement, slopes, tunnels, and bridges; The comprehensive technical condition index of the subgrade (SCI) and the technical condition index of the pavement (PQI) are used for evaluation. The Road Technical Condition Index (PQI) is calculated by weighting the Road Damage Index (PCI), Roughness Index (RQI), Rutting Index (RDI), and Skid Resistance Index (SRI). The slope was assessed using the Subgrade Technical Condition Index (SCI). The final evaluation output, which includes the tunnel's integrated civil engineering structure, electromechanical facilities, and other structures, takes the maximum value as the overall technical condition assessment result. The bridge assessment follows a hierarchical system of "component-part-structure-overall", and the technical condition score is calculated based on the deduction value of each component. For bridges and tunnels, a "one-vote veto" judgment rule is introduced, that is, when a bridge or tunnel has serious defects, it will be directly judged as Category 5. II. Standardize the classification of the technical condition of each structural point; If the technical condition of a structural point is excellent, it is classified into category 1; if the technical condition of a structural point is good, it is classified into category 2; if the technical condition of a structural point is average, it is classified into category 3; if the technical condition of a structural point is subpar, it is classified into category 4; and if the technical condition of a structural point is poor, it is classified into category 5. S2.4 combines the obtained natural disaster risk level with the technical condition level, and determines the final comprehensive risk level of the structural point based on the risk assessment matrix; The final comprehensive risk level, i.e., the structural point classification and grading index, is... express; The final output of the structural point classification and grading index is divided into four levels: Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, and Level 4. The final judgment logic of the structural point classification and grading index is as follows: if the technical condition level of the structural point is rated as Class 4 or Class 5, then regardless of the level of its natural disaster risk, the structural point classification and grading index is uniformly judged as Level 1; if the technical condition level is Class 1 to Class 3, then a step-by-step judgment is made according to the severity of the natural disaster risk. Among them, the structural point classification and grading index is Level 1, corresponding to the initial risk value. The initial risk value is 83; the structural point classification and grading index is level two, corresponding to an initial risk value of 83. The value is 72; the structural point classification and grading index is level three, corresponding to an initial risk value of 72. The initial risk value is 55; the structural point classification and grading index is level four, corresponding to an initial risk value of 55. It is 48.

3. The method for assessing traffic risk at key infrastructure structural points on mountainous expressways according to claim 2, characterized in that, The specific content of step S3 is as follows: I. Based on the "Guidelines for Risk Assessment of Highway Traffic Safety", determine the indicators in the road alignment data that can be included in the "risk range", including: the radius of the circular curve of the road, the longitudinal slope angle, whether there is a continuous long steep downhill slope, the roadside parking sight distance and the central median parking sight distance, the net distance between the tunnel exit and the main line exit ahead and the net distance between the main line entrance and the tunnel entrance ahead, whether there is a main line diversion section, the alignment index of the main line entrance and exit section, and the ramp alignment index. II. Quantify the indicators included in the "risk range" in the road alignment data. The quantified value is used as the initial risk value for the road alignment. express.

4. The method for assessing traffic risk at key infrastructure structural points on mountain highways according to claim 3, characterized in that, The specific content of step S4 is as follows: Based on the "Technical Standards for Highway Engineering" and the "Guidelines for Traffic Safety Risk Assessment of Expressways," indicators from meteorological and traffic flow data that can be included in the "risk range" are determined. These indicators are then quantified, and the quantified values ​​are used as adjustment coefficients. express; The meteorological data indicators include dense fog, water accumulation, icing, crosswinds, and rainfall; Traffic flow data indicators include average daily peak hour congestion, proportion of large vehicles, operating speed, and average daily peak hour vehicle speed dispersion.

5. The method for assessing traffic risk at key infrastructure structural points on mountain highways according to claim 4, characterized in that, The specific content of step S5 is as follows: The various indicators in the special control measures are quantified, and their quantified values ​​are used as correction coefficients. express; The specific control measures correspond to the basic risk / dynamic risk factors. The specific control factor is only included in the assessment and calculation when the corresponding basic risk / dynamic risk is included in the risk level calculation. The indicators for the specific control measures data include infrastructure control measures and traffic flow control measures; Infrastructure control measures include: adding section speed measurement devices, emergency escape lanes, cooling pools, and parking areas; adding sight guidance devices; adding electronic warning devices at tunnel entrances and interchanges; installing driving safety warning devices and driving safety guidance devices on road sections affected by fog; adding drainage devices on road sections affected by water accumulation; installing icing warning devices and automatic icing handling devices on road sections affected by icing; installing crosswind warning devices on road sections affected by crosswinds; and appropriately adding guardrails to overpasses / road sections near cliffs or water. Traffic flow control measures: Restricting, monitoring, and guiding key vehicles; implementing special control measures for overpasses and sections of road adjacent to cliffs and water.

6. The method for assessing traffic risk at key infrastructure structural points on mountain highways according to claim 5, characterized in that, Step S6 includes the following sub-steps: S6.1 Attribution calculation of basic risk indicators; In the formula, The risk contribution of the i-th basic risk indicator included in the assessment; n is the total number of basic risk indicators included in the assessment; S6.2 Attribution calculation of dynamic risk indicators; In the formula, The risk contribution of the j-th dynamic risk indicator included in the assessment; m represents the total number of dynamic risk indicators included in the assessment; S6.3 Calculate the passage risk value of the structural point; In the formula, The passage risk value represents the assessed structural point. This serves as a baseline for background risk, to avoid situations where the risk value is 0. represents the quantified risk value of the i-th basic risk indicator; n represents the total number of basic risk indicators included in the assessment; m represents the total number of dynamic risk indicators included in the assessment; s represents the total number of special control indicators included in the assessment. in, The calculation expression is: In the calculation, firstly based on The basic risk indicators are sorted from highest to lowest; after sorting, The initial risk value for the i-th basic risk indicator; The design logic of this formula is as follows: the first basic risk indicator, that is, the indicator with the highest risk contribution. Take directly The value, subsequently Allocation is based on the remaining risk capacity and is carried out proportionally. S6.4 Determine the risk level of passage at structural points; when When the value is greater than 100, the risk level is Level 1, which is a major risk, and the acceptance level is unacceptable. When 80 < When the value is ≤100, the risk level is Level 2, which is relatively high risk, and the acceptance level is not desirable. When 60 < When the risk level is ≤80, the risk level is Level 3, which is considered moderate risk, and the acceptance level is acceptable. when When the value is ≤60, the risk level is level four, which is low risk, and the acceptance level is acceptable.

Images