Parameterized intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization method and system for underground structure

Abstract

The application discloses an underground structure parameterized intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization method and system, relates to the field of computer-aided design, and comprises the following steps: obtaining segmented data, segment boundary data, load working condition data and initial internal force data, and generating a reinforcement scheme set; obtaining segment demand parameters of each segment based on internal force envelopes and geometric normalization; performing segment internal checking and cost evaluation on the reinforcement scheme, determining a reference reinforcement scheme and a segment internal surplus value; combining adjacent segment relationships, the reference reinforcement scheme, the segment demand parameters and segment boundary allowed deformation threshold values, obtaining segment boundary risk weights; constructing a joint objective function and combining solving on the basis, obtaining a current reinforcement scheme combination; and then obtaining segment boundary feedback parameters through reanalysis, iteratively updating the segment boundary risk weights, and outputting segmented reinforcement schemes meeting convergence conditions until the segmented reinforcement schemes are output. The application can improve the overall coordination, engineering applicability and economy of underground structure reinforcement design.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of computer-aided design technology, and more specifically, this application relates to a method and system for parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization of underground structures. Background Technology

[0002] Underground structures are widely used in projects such as integrated utility tunnels, subway sections, underground passages, and underground factories. With the development of parametric modeling, structural calculation, and automatic construction drawing generation technologies, the design process is gradually shifting from being dominated by human experience to model-driven automated processing. Especially in terms of reinforcement configuration, component verification, and scheme comparison, automated design tools have become an important means to improve design efficiency.

[0003] In existing practices, calculation models are typically established for each structural unit along the line, and the reinforcement configuration is determined independently based on the stress results of each unit under different load conditions. Then, local adjustments are made to the connection points between adjacent units to meet structural or waterproofing requirements. This approach can produce drawings quickly under normal conditions and is therefore widely used. However, underground structures often exhibit cross-sectional changes, local thickening, opening arrangements, abrupt stiffness changes, and differences in connection joint control thresholds. When the stress and deformation characteristics of adjacent locations are not synchronized, and the design process still relies primarily on the locally optimal results obtained for each unit, the stress-deformation coordination relationship at the connection points is not actually incorporated into a unified treatment.

[0004] Furthermore, when remedial measures are subsequently implemented only through localized smoothing or empirical corrections, while superficial configuration differences can be reduced, they cannot accurately reflect the deformation response of the connection under actual loads. Instead, this may result in one side of the component retaining excessive stiffness while the other side retains insufficient crack resistance, ultimately leading to a concentrated risk of connection opening, cracking, or leakage. Therefore, it can be seen that the key problem with existing technologies lies not in insufficient load-bearing capacity verification at individual locations, but in the lack of a processing mechanism that can simultaneously reflect the stress differences between adjacent locations, connection threshold constraints, and feedback results after scheme adjustments during the overall design process. Therefore, a parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization method and system for underground structures are proposed to address this issue. Summary of the Invention

[0005] To address the aforementioned technical problems, this technical solution provides a method and system for parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization of underground structures, which solves the problems mentioned in the background section.

[0006] To achieve the above objectives, the technical solution of the present invention is as follows:

[0007] Firstly, this application provides a parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization method for underground structures, which is applied to the design scheme of underground structures divided into multiple segments along the route, including:

[0008] Acquire segment data, segment boundary data, load condition data and corresponding initial internal force data for each segment, wherein the segment boundary data is the cross-sectional data at the connection boundary between adjacent segments;

[0009] Based on preset reinforcement type parameters and constraint parameters, the segmented data is enumerated and constraint verification is performed to generate a set of reinforcement schemes.

[0010] Based on the initial internal force data and load condition data, internal force envelope processing is performed on each segment, and normalization processing is performed in combination with the segment data to obtain the segment requirement parameters of each segment.

[0011] Based on the initial internal force data, the reinforcement schemes in the set of reinforcement schemes are checked and cost evaluated within each segment to obtain evaluation parameters. Based on the evaluation parameters, the benchmark reinforcement scheme for each segment and the segment margin value characterizing the remaining adjustment capacity of the segment are determined.

[0012] Based on preset weighting coefficients, the baseline reinforcement schemes, segment demand parameters, and preset allowable deformation thresholds of two adjacent segments are normalized and weighted to obtain the segment boundary risk weights.

[0013] Under the constraint of adjacent segmentation relationship, a joint objective function is constructed based on evaluation parameters, intra-segment surplus value and segment boundary risk weight, and a combination solution is performed on the set of reinforcement schemes to obtain the current reinforcement scheme combination.

[0014] A reanalysis model is established based on the current reinforcement scheme combination, and a reanalysis process is performed in combination with load case data to obtain the segment boundary feedback parameters that characterize the segment boundary stress and segment boundary check results.

[0015] The segment boundary risk weights are updated based on the segment boundary feedback parameters, and the combined solution and reanalysis are repeated based on the updated segment boundary risk weights until the preset convergence condition is met, and the segmented reinforcement scheme is output.

[0016] Secondly, this application provides a parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization system for underground structures, which is applied to underground structure design schemes divided into multiple segments along a route, and is used to implement the aforementioned parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization method for underground structures, including:

[0017] The data acquisition module is used to acquire segment data, segment boundary data, load condition data and corresponding initial internal force data for each segment. The segment boundary data is the cross-sectional data at the connection boundary between adjacent segments.

[0018] The scheme construction module is used to enumerate and verify the segmented data based on preset reinforcement type parameters and constraint parameters to generate a set of reinforcement schemes.

[0019] The segment demand calculation module is used to perform internal force envelope processing on each segment based on initial internal force data and load condition data, and perform normalization processing in combination with segment data to obtain the segment demand parameters of each segment.

[0020] The module for determining the baseline scheme and calculating the intra-segment margin is used to perform intra-segment verification and cost evaluation on each reinforcement scheme in the set of reinforcement schemes based on the initial internal force data, obtain evaluation parameters, and determine the baseline reinforcement scheme for each segment and the intra-segment margin value characterizing the remaining adjustment capacity of the segment based on the evaluation parameters.

[0021] The risk weight calculation module is used to perform normalized weighted calculations on the benchmark reinforcement scheme, segment demand parameters, and preset segment boundary allowable deformation threshold of two adjacent segments based on preset weight coefficients, so as to obtain the segment boundary risk weight.

[0022] The scheme combination construction module is used to construct a joint objective function based on evaluation parameters, intra-segment surplus values ​​and segment boundary risk weights under the constraint of adjacent segment relationships, and perform combination solution on the set of reinforcement schemes to obtain the current reinforcement scheme combination.

[0023] The feedback parameter processing module is used to establish a reanalysis model based on the current reinforcement scheme combination, and perform reanalysis processing in combination with load case data to obtain the segment boundary feedback parameters that characterize the segment boundary stress and segment boundary verification results.

[0024] The reinforcement scheme output module is used to update the segment boundary risk weight based on the segment boundary feedback parameters, and repeatedly execute the combined solution and the reanalysis process based on the updated segment boundary risk weight until the preset convergence condition is met, and output the segmented reinforcement scheme.

[0025] Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects of the present invention are as follows:

[0026] This application generates segment boundary risk weights based on the benchmark reinforcement schemes of adjacent segments, segment demand parameters, and allowable deformation thresholds of segment boundaries. It solves the problem that existing technologies cannot simultaneously reflect stiffness differences, stress differences, and connection control boundaries, and realizes a quantitative characterization of segment boundary continuity risk, thereby enabling the identification of high-risk segment boundaries and improving their constraint strength.

[0027] Under the constraint of adjacent segment relationships, this application constructs a joint objective function based on evaluation parameters, intra-segment residual values, and segment boundary risk weights, and solves it by combination. This solves the problem of sudden changes in segment boundary stiffness and reinforcement fracture caused by independent optimization of each segment, and achieves an overall balance between single-segment economy, intra-segment adjustment capability, and segment boundary continuity.

[0028] This application also solves the problem that static one-time design cannot reflect the actual segment response after scheme adjustment by establishing a reanalysis model and combining load condition data to obtain segment feedback parameters; and dynamically updates the segment risk weight based on the segment feedback parameters, repeatedly executes combined solution and reanalysis processing, realizes closed-loop convergence optimization of segment reinforcement scheme for actual segment risk, thereby reducing the risk of opening, cracking and leakage, and improving the engineering applicability, stability and economy of parameterized intelligent design results of underground structures. Attached Figure Description

[0029] The disclosure of this invention is illustrated with reference to the accompanying drawings. It should be understood that the drawings are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to limit the scope of protection of this invention. Wherein:

[0030] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of the parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization method for underground structures proposed in this invention.

[0031] Figure 2 This is a structural schematic diagram of the parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization system for underground structures in this invention. Detailed Implementation

[0032] It is readily understood that, based on the technical solution of this invention, those skilled in the art can propose various interchangeable structural methods and implementations without altering the essential spirit of the invention. Therefore, the following detailed embodiments and accompanying drawings are merely illustrative examples of the technical solution of this invention and should not be considered as the entirety of the invention or as limitations or restrictions on the technical solution of this invention.

[0033] In the traditional automated design process for underground structures, reinforcement determination is usually based on the independent stress results of each segment under different load conditions. The problem is that it cannot dynamically adapt to the continuity constraints caused by differences in cross-sectional changes, local thickening, opening layout, and joint control requirements between adjacent segments. When a standard segment is arranged adjacent to an equipment compartment segment, a locally thickened segment, or an opening segment, although each segment meets its own load-bearing and crack resistance requirements, the stiffness level, dominant stress characteristics, and allowable deformation boundaries between adjacent segments are not consistent. If the "independent segment optimization, segment boundary correction" approach is still adopted, the actual stress and deformation coordination relationships at the segment boundaries cannot be included in the unified calculation, resulting in a disconnect between the design judgment basis and the actual working state of the segment boundaries. This is especially true in areas where stiffness abrupt changes and control threshold differences overlap, making it even more difficult to accurately identify high-risk conditions at the connection points.

[0034] For example, in a certain integrated utility tunnel project, the standard section is 30m long with a sidewall thickness of 450mm. However, the adjacent equipment compartment, due to local widening and thickening, has a sidewall thickness increased to 600mm, and the allowable opening threshold for the construction joint at this location is only 6mm. Under conventional design procedures, the standard section selects a more economical reinforcement scheme based on the bending moment and shear force results of this section, while the equipment compartment selects a stronger reinforcement scheme based on its higher load-bearing requirements. Both meet their respective section verification requirements. However, when groundwater pressure, temperature gradient, and uneven settlement act together, the deformation responses of the standard section and the equipment compartment are not synchronized. One side has lower stiffness and insufficient crack resistance margin, while the other side has higher stiffness and limited deformation, resulting in a gradual increase in the relative rotation angle and equivalent opening at the construction joint. Traditional methods still rely primarily on the local optimal results of each segment, and only reduce the reinforcement differences on the surface through empirical smoothing in the subsequent process. They do not take into account the demand differences between adjacent segments, the allowable deformation threshold of the segment boundary, and the feedback results after the scheme adjustment. Therefore, it is difficult to identify in time the state that the segment boundary has approached the opening control boundary.

[0035] If the aforementioned problems are not addressed, automated design systems for underground structures will be unable to accurately identify boundary risks caused by abrupt changes in stiffness between adjacent segments, differences in dominant forces, and connection threshold constraints. This can lead to either insufficient or excessive local modifications. When modifications are insufficient, connections may experience excessive opening, concentrated cracking, or even the formation of leakage channels under actual loads, especially near construction joints and expansion joints, where leakage risks can continue to expand along weak structural zones. Conversely, excessive modifications may increase reinforcement levels near low-risk boundary segments in pursuit of boundary continuity, resulting in increased material usage and construction complexity, while simultaneously compressing the economic space within the segment that should be preserved. This mismatch between "local independent optimality" and "overall continuity constraints" severely restricts the engineering applicability of parametric intelligent design technology in complex underground structure scenarios.

[0036] Faced with the aforementioned problems, this application first analyzes the reasons for the failure of the traditional segmented independent design mechanism, finding that it lies in the failure to establish a closed-loop correlation between the stress differences of adjacent segments, the allowable deformation constraints of connection parts, and the actual segment boundary response after scheme adjustment. To address this, this application attempts to extract control parameters that characterize bending moment demand, shear force demand, and crack sensitivity from the multi-condition internal force results of each segment, and uses these parameters, along with the stiffness information of the benchmark scheme of adjacent segments, to characterize the continuity risk of segment boundaries. Furthermore, this application introduces a joint solution mechanism across the entire line, enabling the segment economy, segment margin, and segment boundary constraints to be balanced collaboratively under the same objective. Simultaneously, it dynamically corrects the risk weights by combining the segment boundary stress and verification results obtained from the reanalysis, avoiding the limitations of relying solely on static difference judgments. After verifying various risk characterization methods and iterative correction methods, it is finally determined to couple the differences between adjacent segments, the allowable deformation boundaries of segment boundaries, and the feedback verification results into a closed-loop processing logic, forming a parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization scheme for segmented design scenarios of underground structures.

[0037] Example 1:

[0038] like Figure 1 As shown, this application introduces a parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization method for underground structures, which is applied to the design scheme of underground structures divided into multiple segments along the route, including:

[0039] S1: Obtain segment data, segment boundary data, load condition data and corresponding initial internal force data for each segment. The segment boundary data is the cross-sectional data at the connection boundary between adjacent segments.

[0040] Specifically, the first step is to obtain segment data, segment boundary data, load case data, and the corresponding initial internal force data. Segment data should at least include segment number, segment length, section height, wall thickness, and structural identifier; segment boundary data should at least include segment boundary number, preceding segment number, succeeding segment number, joint type, and allowable deformation threshold; load case data should at least include load case number, load type, and load case combination relationship; and initial internal force data should at least include the bending moment and shear force values ​​of each segment under each load case.

[0041] Subsequently, the segmented data undergoes checks for uniqueness of numbering, continuity of mileage, and validity of geometric quantities. Segment boundary data undergoes a matching check for sequential segment numbers. Load case data undergoes a load case number integrity check. Initial internal force data undergoes a double-key integrity check for "segment number - load case number". For data that passes the checks, the units and indexing rules are standardized, and a segment index table, segment boundary connection table, and load case index sequence are established. Initial internal force data is then organized according to "segment number - load case number," and standardized input data is output.

[0042] Example: Taking a 1.26km integrated utility tunnel project as an example, the entire line is divided into 42 segments. The 12th segment is 30m long and 3.8m high. The allowable deformation threshold of the segment boundary connected to it is 6mm. The bending moment and shear force values ​​are recorded under 6 working conditions. After completing the index matching and threshold validity check, the data of this segment and other segments of the entire line are output together for direct use in subsequent steps.

[0043] S2: Based on preset reinforcement type parameters and constraint parameters, enumerate and verify the segmented data to generate a set of reinforcement schemes;

[0044] Step S2 specifically includes:

[0045] Based on the set of steel bar diameters, steel bar spacings, and number of reinforcement layers in the preset reinforcement type parameters, a set of candidate reinforcement schemes is obtained by performing combination enumeration on the segment based on the reinforcement type parameters.

[0046] The candidate reinforcement schemes are checked and judged based on the structural constraints in the constraint parameters. Candidate reinforcement schemes that do not meet the minimum reinforcement ratio constraint, maximum spacing constraint, protective layer thickness constraint, or minimum clear spacing constraint are screened out to obtain a set of reinforcement schemes.

[0047] Read the pre-configured reinforcement type parameter table and constraint parameter table. The reinforcement type parameter table provides the range of values ​​for the steel bar diameter, steel bar spacing, and number of reinforcement layers corresponding to different structural types, while the constraint parameter table provides the minimum reinforcement ratio, maximum allowable spacing, protective layer thickness, and minimum clear spacing.

[0048] Process each segment according to its segment number: First, based on the structural identifier and cross-sectional dimensions of the segment, read the set of available steel bar diameters, steel bar spacing, and number of reinforcement layers from the reinforcement parameter table for that segment; then, combine and enumerate the three to generate candidate reinforcement schemes.

[0049] For each candidate reinforcement scheme, the area of ​​steel bars per meter width is calculated based on the steel bar diameter, spacing, and number of reinforcement layers, and the reinforcement ratio is calculated accordingly. Then, it is determined whether the reinforcement ratio is not less than the minimum reinforcement ratio, whether the steel bar spacing is not greater than the maximum allowable spacing, whether the protective layer thickness is not less than the design threshold, and whether the clear spacing of the steel bars is not less than the minimum clear spacing. Only candidate reinforcement schemes that pass all four criteria are retained in the reinforcement scheme set for that segment.

[0050] Examples of possible values ​​for the rebar diameter set are: 16mm, 18mm, 20mm, and 22mm; examples of possible values ​​for the rebar spacing set are: 150mm, 200mm, and 250mm; examples of possible values ​​for the number of reinforcement layers set are: 1 layer and 2 layers; if the project has heavy-duty equipment compartments, 24mm can also be added as an extended diameter candidate value.

[0051] The minimum reinforcement ratio can be set as 0.20% for example; the maximum allowable spacing can be set as 200mm for example; the protective layer thickness can be set as 40mm for side walls and 50mm for top and bottom slabs for example; the minimum clear spacing can be set as 25mm for example; the threshold for determining the use of marking for large-diameter steel bars can be set as 1 when the steel bar diameter is greater than or equal to 20mm, and 0 otherwise.

[0052] Example: Taking the 12th segment of a utility tunnel as an example, the sidewall thickness is 450mm, the rebar diameter is 16, 18, 20, 22mm, the spacing is 150, 200, 250mm, and the number of layers is 1 or 2. Assume a total of 24 candidate reinforcement schemes are enumerated. The scheme "Φ16@250, single layer" is eliminated due to insufficient reinforcement ratio and excessive spacing, while "Φ18@200, double layer" meets the requirements for minimum reinforcement ratio, maximum allowable spacing, protective layer thickness, and minimum clear distance, and is retained. Ultimately, this segment outputs 11 valid reinforcement schemes, which serve as input for the next step.

[0053] S3: Based on the initial internal force data and load condition data, perform internal force envelope processing on each segment and normalize the segment data to obtain the segment requirement parameters for each segment.

[0054] Step S3 specifically includes:

[0055] Based on the bending moment results corresponding to each load condition in the load case data, the bending moment control value is obtained by extracting the maximum absolute value of the i-th segment. ;

[0056] Based on the shear force results corresponding to each load condition in the load condition data, the maximum absolute value is extracted for the i-th segment to obtain the shear force control value. ;

[0057] Based on the cross-sectional height of the segment data in the i-th segment and Calculate the crack sensitivity requirement value ;

[0058] Crack sensitivity requirement value satisfied:

[0059] ;

[0060] According to the segmentation of the entire line , and Normalization and truncation are performed respectively to obtain the segment requirement parameters of the i-th segment. The truncation process refers to truncating the value to the range of 0-1.

[0061] Read the bending moment and shear force values ​​for each segment under all working conditions according to the segment number, and take the maximum absolute value as the bending moment control value and shear force control value respectively. Then, read the section height of the corresponding segment from the segment data, and divide the bending moment control value by the section height to obtain the crack sensitivity requirement value. After that, calculate the maximum value of the bending moment control value, shear force control value, and crack sensitivity requirement value for the entire line, and then divide these three values ​​for each segment by the corresponding maximum value for the entire line, limiting the result to between 0 and 1, to form the segment requirement parameters for that segment. If a segment lacks a bending moment or shear force value under any working condition, or if the section height is less than or equal to zero, then the segment requirement parameters for that segment are not output.

[0062] Example: Taking the 12th segment of a certain integrated utility tunnel as an example, its maximum bending moment under six working conditions is 521 kN·m, the maximum shear force is 216 kN, and the section height is 3.8 m. Therefore, the crack sensitivity requirement value is approximately 137.1. If the corresponding maximum bending moment control value, maximum shear force control value, and maximum crack sensitivity requirement value for the entire line are 605, 248, and 160.0 respectively, then the normalized segment requirement parameters for this segment are [0.861, 0.871, 0.857]. This result serves as the direct input for subsequent calculation of the segment boundary risk weight.

[0063] Through the above technical solution, this application solves the problem that the existing automatic design process for underground structures, which directly uses the original internal force results under multiple working conditions, is difficult to accurately characterize the actual dominant force characteristics of each segment. By performing envelope processing on the bending moment and shear force values ​​of each segment under different load conditions, and combining them with the cross-sectional height to construct crack-sensitive demand values, and then uniformly normalizing them, this approach not only preserves the control force information of each segment under multiple working conditions, but also eliminates the interference of different dimensions and different numerical ranges on subsequent comparisons. This results in segment demand parameters that can characterize bending moment demand, shear force demand, and crack-sensitive demand, ensuring that the subsequent calculation of segment boundary risk weights can accurately reflect the force differences between adjacent segments.

[0064] S4: Based on the initial internal force data, perform intra-segment verification and cost assessment on each reinforcement scheme in the reinforcement scheme set to obtain evaluation parameters, and determine the benchmark reinforcement scheme for each segment and the intra-segment margin value characterizing the remaining adjustment capacity of the segment based on the evaluation parameters.

[0065] The process of obtaining specific evaluation parameters in step S4 includes:

[0066] Based on the initial internal force data, the utilization rate of bending moment bearing capacity, shear force bearing capacity and crack control capacity of the reinforcement scheme are calculated.

[0067] The maximum value among the moment bearing capacity utilization rate, shear bearing capacity utilization rate, and crack control utilization rate is taken as the intra-segment verification result of the reinforcement scheme;

[0068] The preset maximum utilization threshold can be set to 1.00 for example, so that only schemes with an in-segment verification result less than or equal to 1.00 are retained to participate in the benchmark reinforcement scheme selection.

[0069] The amount of steel reinforcement is calculated based on the reinforcement scheme, and the cost assessment results are calculated in combination with the number of reinforcement layers and the markings for the use of large-diameter steel reinforcement.

[0070] The cost assessment results meet the following requirements:

[0071] ;

[0072] in, Indicates the reinforcement scheme for the i-th segment. The cost assessment results Indicates the reinforcement scheme for the i-th segment. Dimensionless steel reinforcement usage Indicates the reinforcement scheme for the i-th segment. The number of reinforcement layers, Indicates the reinforcement scheme for the i-th segment. Large-diameter steel bars are marked. and This indicates the preset weighting coefficient;

[0073] Preset weighting coefficients in cost assessment results and An example can be set as: =2, used as a penalty for the number of reinforcement layers; =5, used as a penalty for the use of large-diameter steel bars.

[0074] The results of the segment verification and the cost assessment are used together as evaluation parameters.

[0075] Step S4, which involves determining the baseline reinforcement scheme and the allowance value within each segment based on the evaluation parameters, specifically includes:

[0076] Based on the evaluation parameters of the reinforcement scheme, the reinforcement schemes with verification results within the segment that are less than or equal to the preset maximum utilization rate threshold are selected, and the reinforcement scheme with the lowest cost evaluation result is selected as the benchmark reinforcement scheme for that segment.

[0077] Calculate the residual value within the segment based on the segment check results of the benchmark reinforcement scheme, and perform truncation processing on the residual value within the segment;

[0078] The remaining value within the segment satisfies:

[0079] ;

[0080] in, This represents the residual value within the i-th segment; Represents the benchmark reinforcement scheme for the i-th segment. The results of the segment verification This means truncating the value to the range of 0-1.

[0081] Specifically, all reinforcement schemes for each segment are read according to the segment number, and the bending moment control value and shear force control value for that segment under all working conditions are also read. Then, for each reinforcement scheme, the bending moment bearing capacity utilization rate, shear force bearing capacity utilization rate, and crack control utilization rate are calculated, and the maximum value of these three is used as the segment-level verification result. Simultaneously, the amount of steel reinforcement is calculated based on the steel diameter, spacing, and number of reinforcement layers in the reinforcement scheme, and the cost assessment result is obtained by combining the number of reinforcement layers and the usage markings for large-diameter steel reinforcement. The segment-level verification result and the cost assessment result are used together as evaluation parameters. Then, among the schemes that satisfy the segment-level verification result not exceeding the preset requirement, the scheme with the smallest cost assessment result is selected as the benchmark reinforcement scheme for that segment; the result of "1 minus the segment-level verification result of the benchmark reinforcement scheme" is then used as the segment-level margin value, and truncation processing is performed.

[0082] Example: Taking the 12th segment of a certain integrated utility tunnel as an example, among the three candidate schemes, the intra-segment verification result of "Φ18@200, double-layer" is 0.93, and the cost assessment result is 79.9; the intra-segment verification result of "Φ20@200, double-layer" is 0.84, and the cost assessment result is 102.7; the intra-segment verification result of "Φ22@150, double-layer" is 0.71, and the cost assessment result is 160.0. Since all three meet the intra-segment verification requirements, "Φ18@200, double-layer" with the lowest cost assessment result is selected as the benchmark reinforcement scheme, and the intra-segment surplus value is 0.07. The evaluation parameters, benchmark reinforcement scheme, and intra-segment surplus value output by this segment will be used as inputs for subsequent steps to calculate the segment boundary risk weight and joint objective function.

[0083] Through the above technical solution, this application solves the problem that existing reinforcement optimization methods for underground structures cannot simultaneously consider the segmented stress requirements and reinforcement costs. Based on the candidate reinforcement scheme set for each segment and its corresponding internal force data, intra-segment verification and cost assessment are performed. This ensures that the reinforcement scheme for each segment meets safety requirements and avoids excessive construction costs based on cost assessment. At the same time, by calculating the benchmark reinforcement scheme and the intra-segment margin value, the adjustment space of the segmented reinforcement scheme is further improved, ensuring that the optimization results meet both structural requirements and engineering economic requirements.

[0084] S5: Based on the preset weighting coefficients, the baseline reinforcement scheme, segment demand parameters, and preset allowable deformation threshold of the segment boundary of two adjacent segments are normalized and weighted to obtain the segment boundary risk weight.

[0085] Step S5 specifically includes:

[0086] Calculate the stiffness difference sub-parameters based on the benchmark reinforcement scheme of adjacent segments;

[0087] The stiffness difference sub-parameter satisfies:

[0088] ;

[0089] in, This represents the stiffness difference sub-parameter corresponding to segment boundary e. and Let represent the baseline reinforcement schemes for adjacent segments on both sides of segment boundary e, and let K represent the equivalent flexural stiffness. This means truncating the value to the range of 0-1;

[0090] Calculate the demand difference sub-parameters based on the segment demand parameters of adjacent segments;

[0091] The demand difference sub-parameters satisfy:

[0092] ;

[0093] in, The parameter representing the demand difference at segment boundary e indicates that the closer adjacent segments are in terms of bending moment demand, shear force demand, and crack sensitivity demand, the closer the demand difference parameter is to 0; if the differences in all three demand components are large simultaneously, the demand difference parameter increases, indicating that the force control mechanisms on both sides of the segment boundary are more significantly different. This represents the segment requirement parameter for the i-th segment. This represents the segment requirement parameter for the j-th segment. This means truncating the value to the range of 0-1;

[0094] Calculate the threshold-sensitive sub-parameter based on the allowable deformation threshold of the segment boundary;

[0095] The threshold-sensitive sub-parameter satisfies:

[0096] ;

[0097] in, This represents the threshold-sensitive sub-parameter. This indicates the minimum allowable deformation threshold value for the segment boundary. This indicates the allowable deformation threshold for the segment boundary. This represents the joint type coefficient, preset according to the joint type category. For example, 1.0 is used for construction joints, 0.8 for post-pouring strips, and 0.6 for expansion joints. This means truncating the value to the range of 0-1;

[0098] Weighted fusion processing is performed based on stiffness difference sub-parameter, demand difference sub-parameter and threshold sensitivity sub-parameter to obtain segment boundary risk weights, and the obtained segment boundary risk weights are then truncated.

[0099] The preset weighting coefficients for the three items—stiffness difference, demand difference, and threshold sensitivity—can be set as follows: 0.40, 0.35, and 0.25, respectively. This prioritizes reflecting abrupt changes in stiffness, then considers demand differences, and finally introduces segment boundaries to control boundary sensitivity.

[0100] Preset seam coefficient For example, the values ​​can be set as follows: 1.0 for construction joints; 0.8 for post-cast strips; and 0.6 for expansion joints.

[0101] The allowable deformation threshold for the segment boundary can be set as follows: 6mm for construction joint; 10mm for expansion joint; and 8mm for post-cast strip.

[0102] The relationship between adjacent segments is determined based on the preceding and succeeding segment numbers in the segment boundary data. It is then checked whether both segments have a baseline reinforcement scheme and segment requirement parameters, and whether the allowable deformation threshold of the segment boundary is greater than zero. For each valid segment boundary, three types of quantities are calculated: one is the stiffness difference between the baseline reinforcement schemes of adjacent segments, i.e., the ratio of the difference in equivalent bending stiffness on both sides to the larger of the two values, truncated to between 0 and 1; another is the requirement difference between the segment requirement parameters of adjacent segments, i.e., the normalized difference in the three-dimensional segment requirement parameter vector, truncated to between 0 and 1; and the third is a threshold-sensitive quantity, i.e., the ratio of the minimum allowable deformation threshold to the allowable deformation threshold of the current segment boundary, multiplied by the joint type coefficient. Subsequently, the above three types of quantities are weighted and fused according to preset weight coefficients, and the result is truncated to between 0 and 1, outputting the segment boundary risk weight.

[0103] Example: Taking segment 12 of a certain integrated utility tunnel project as an example, the equivalent bending stiffness of segment 12 and segment 13 are respectively... N·mm² and The stiffness difference is approximately 0.241 N·mm²; the corresponding segment requirement parameters are [0.861, 0.871, 0.857] and [0.794, 0.802, 0.765], with a requirement difference of approximately 0.077; this segment boundary is a construction joint with an allowable deformation threshold of 6 mm and a threshold sensitivity of 1.0. If the weighting coefficients are 0.40, 0.35, and 0.25, respectively, the risk weight of this segment boundary is approximately 0.373. This risk weight will be used as the weighting coefficient for the difference term between adjacent segments in the subsequent joint objective function.

[0104] Through the above technical solution, this application solves the problem of accurately identifying the continuity risk at the connection points of adjacent segments in the existing automatic design process of underground structures. By calculating the stiffness difference based on the benchmark reinforcement scheme of adjacent segments and the demand difference based on the segment demand parameters of adjacent segments, and combining the allowable deformation threshold of the segment boundary and the sensitivity of the joint type construction threshold, it can reflect the inconsistency of adjacent segments in structural stiffness and stress control characteristics, and also reflect the difference in the allowable boundary of deformation of different segment boundaries. At the same time, by performing weighted fusion on the above difference information to obtain the segment boundary risk weight, it ensures that the subsequent joint solution can impose stronger continuity constraints on high-risk segment boundaries.

[0105] S6: Under the constraint of adjacent segmentation relationship, a joint objective function is constructed based on the evaluation parameters, the residual value within the segment and the risk weight of the segment boundary, and a combination solution is performed on the set of reinforcement schemes to obtain the current reinforcement scheme combination.

[0106] Step S6 specifically includes:

[0107] Cost items are constructed based on the cost assessment results of each reinforcement scheme;

[0108] Based on the degree of deviation of each reinforcement scheme from the corresponding benchmark reinforcement scheme, and combined with the intra-segment allowance value of the corresponding segment, a benchmark deviation item is constructed.

[0109] Based on the differences between adjacent segment reinforcement schemes, and combined with the segment boundary risk weights of the corresponding segments, an incompatibility term is constructed.

[0110] A joint objective function is constructed based on the cost term, the benchmark deviation term, and the incompatibility term, and a combination solution is performed on the set of reinforcement schemes to obtain the current reinforcement scheme combination.

[0111] The joint objective function satisfies:

[0112] ;

[0113] in, This represents the joint objective function value. Indicates the reinforcement scheme for the i-th segment. The equivalent bending stiffness, This represents the baseline reinforcement scheme for the i-th segment. This represents the residual value within the i-th segment. Indicates a preset positive number. This represents the segment boundary risk weight of segment boundary e. and This indicates the preset weighting coefficient. This indicates a deviation from the baseline reinforcement scheme. When the intra-segment margin of a segment is small, meaning its baseline reinforcement scheme is close to the single-segment control boundary, deviation from the baseline reinforcement scheme will result in a greater penalty. This helps avoid over-adjusting already strained segments in subsequent solutions. The incompatibility term reflects the degree of stiffness discontinuity on both sides of the segment boundary under the current round of candidate scheme selection. The larger the value, the more likely the two sides of the segment boundary are to produce more obvious deformation inconsistencies in subsequent reanalysis.

[0114] The preset weighting coefficients for the benchmark deviation term and the incompatibility term can be set as follows: μ=0.10, used to control the penalty intensity for deviations from the benchmark reinforcement scheme; λ=40, used to control the penalty intensity for differences between adjacent schemes at the boundary of high-risk sections. Preset positive numbers in the joint objective function. For example, it can be set to 0.05 to avoid the denominator becoming invalid when the residual value within the segment is close to zero.

[0115] Each segment is checked to ensure it has at least one available reinforcement scheme, and each valid segment boundary is checked to ensure it has a corresponding segment boundary risk weight. Then, for each reinforcement scheme, two types of quantities are calculated: one is the deviation from the benchmark reinforcement scheme for that segment, which is obtained by modulating the difference in equivalent flexural stiffness between the two schemes with the intra-segment margin value; the other is the difference between candidate reinforcement schemes in adjacent segments, which is obtained by calculating the difference in equivalent flexural stiffness between adjacent sides. Then, the cost assessment results of each scheme, the deviation, and the adjacent difference weighted by the segment boundary risk weight are combined to form a joint objective function, which is then recursively solved over the set of reinforcement schemes for all segments to obtain the current combination of reinforcement schemes.

[0116] Example: Taking sections 12, 13, and 14 of a certain integrated utility tunnel as an example, the cost corresponding to the benchmark reinforcement scheme for section 12 is 79.9, and the equivalent bending stiffness is... N·mm², the allowance within the segment is 0.07; the cost corresponding to the benchmark reinforcement scheme for segment 13 is 88.4, and the equivalent flexural stiffness is N·mm²; the risk weight for segment 12 is 0.373. When segment 12 adopts a reinforcement scheme with a higher stiffness, its single-segment cost increases, but the adjacent difference between it and segment 13 decreases significantly. Therefore, a smaller cumulative cost across the entire line may be obtained in the joint objective function. After performing the same combination calculation on all segments of the entire line, the current reinforcement scheme combination for this round is output for direct use in the next reanalysis step.

[0117] Through the above technical solution, this application solves the problem that independent optimization of each segment in the existing automatic design process of underground structures makes it difficult to simultaneously consider the economy of each segment and the continuity of the segment boundaries. Under the constraint of the relationship between adjacent segments, a joint objective function is constructed based on evaluation parameters, the residual value within the segment and the risk weight of the segment boundary. This avoids the sudden change in stiffness and reinforcement fracture at high-risk segment boundaries caused by selecting a scheme based solely on the principle of minimizing the cost of a single segment. It also prevents excessive adjustment from being applied to segments with small residual values ​​within the segment, thereby destroying their original verification margin. At the same time, by combining and solving the reinforcement schemes of the entire line, the cost of a single segment, the degree of deviation from the benchmark and the degree of incompatibility of the segment boundaries are balanced, ensuring that the current combination of reinforcement schemes can simultaneously satisfy the overall economy, the stability within the segment and the coordination of the segment boundaries.

[0118] S7: Based on the current reinforcement scheme combination, establish a reanalysis model and perform reanalysis processing in combination with load case data to obtain the segment boundary feedback parameters that characterize the segment boundary stress and segment boundary check results;

[0119] Step S7 specifically includes:

[0120] Based on the equivalent bending stiffness of each segment in the current reinforcement scheme, a reanalysis model along the line is established. The reanalysis model adopts an equivalent beam model that is discrete by segment. Each segment corresponds to a beam element, and each segment boundary corresponds to the connection position of adjacent beam elements.

[0121] Based on the load case data, internal force solutions are performed on the reanalysis model to obtain the end bending moments of each section under each load case.

[0122] The maximum absolute value of the end bending moment at both ends of the section boundary under each working condition is taken to obtain the control value of the end bending moment of the section boundary.

[0123] The predicted opening of the segment boundary is calculated based on the bending moment control value at the end of the segment boundary, the equivalent bending stiffness corresponding to the current reinforcement scheme, the preset influence length ratio, and the section height at the segment boundary, which characterizes the degree of deformation at the boundary.

[0124] The segment boundary verification results are calculated based on the predicted segment boundary opening and the allowable segment boundary deformation threshold.

[0125] The boundary check results meet the following requirements: ;

[0126] in, This indicates the result of the boundary check. This indicates the allowable deformation threshold for the segment boundary. This indicates that the segment boundary is predicted to open. This indicates truncation, cutting the value to between 0 and 1;

[0127] The end moment control value of the section boundary and the section boundary verification result are used as the section boundary feedback parameters.

[0128] Among them, the segment boundary prediction opening satisfies:

[0129] Calculate the influence length of adjacent segments on both sides of segment boundary e: , ;

[0130] in, and These represent the influence lengths of adjacent segments on both sides of segment boundary (e). This indicates the preset influence length ratio. and These represent the lengths of adjacent segments. The preset influence length ratio p can be set to 0.20, meaning the influence length on both sides of the segment boundary is 20% of the corresponding segment length. If the segment is short or the local stiffness influence at the connection point is more concentrated, p can be adjusted to 0.15; if the segment is long and the influence range of the segment boundary is larger, it can be adjusted to 0.25.

[0131] Compute the curvature surrogate of adjacent segments on both sides of segment boundary e: ,

[0132] in, and These represent the curvature proxies of adjacent segments on both sides of segment boundary (e), and These represent the end moment control values ​​of adjacent segments on both sides of segment boundary e. and These represent the equivalent flexural stiffness of adjacent segments in the current reinforcement scheme;

[0133] Calculate segment boundary prediction opening: ;

[0134] in, The segment boundary prediction of segment boundary e is open. This represents half the height of the cross section at segment boundary e.

[0135] Specifically, the equivalent flexural stiffness of each segment is extracted based on the current reinforcement scheme combination, and a reanalysis model along the line is established by combining the segment length and the segment boundary connection relationship. Then, load case data is applied to this model case by case, and the end bending moments on both sides of each segment boundary are calculated under each case. The maximum absolute value is taken for all cases to obtain the end bending moment control values ​​on both sides of the segment boundary. Next, the curvature proxy on both sides is calculated based on the end bending moment control values ​​and the equivalent flexural stiffness. Then, the curvature difference on both sides is mapped to the predicted segment boundary opening based on the preset influence length ratio, segment length, and section height at the segment boundary. The predicted segment boundary opening is then compared with the allowable deformation threshold of the segment boundary and truncated to between 0 and 1 to obtain the segment boundary verification result. Finally, the end bending moment control values ​​and the segment boundary verification result are output together as segment boundary feedback parameters.

[0136] Example: Taking section 12 of a certain integrated utility tunnel as an example, the equivalent bending stiffness of the two sides are respectively N·mm² and The maximum end bending moments obtained from the reanalysis under six working conditions were 742 kN·m and 536 kN·m, respectively. Based on an influence length ratio of 0.2 and a characteristic distance of 1900 mm, the predicted segment opening was approximately 0.50 mm. Comparing this to the allowable deformation threshold of 6 mm, the segment check result was approximately 0.083. This segment feedback parameter will serve as the direct input for updating the segment risk weight in the next step.

[0137] Through the above technical solution, this application solves the problem that the existing automatic design process of underground structures cannot accurately reflect the actual stress state and verification state of the segment boundaries under the current reinforcement scheme by relying solely on static calculation results. It establishes a reanalysis model for the current reinforcement scheme combination and performs reanalysis in combination with load case data. It not only extracts the end bending moment control values ​​of each segment boundary under multiple loading conditions, but also calculates the predicted opening of the segment boundary by combining the equivalent bending stiffness, influence length and segment boundary geometric parameters. At the same time, by combining the end bending moment control values ​​with the segment boundary verification results to form segment boundary feedback parameters, it ensures that the subsequent segment boundary risk weight update can match the actual segment boundary response under the current reinforcement scheme.

[0138] S8: Update the segment boundary risk weight based on the segment boundary feedback parameters, and repeat the combined solution and reanalysis processing based on the updated segment boundary risk weight until the preset convergence condition is met, and output the segmented reinforcement scheme.

[0139] Step S8 specifically includes:

[0140] Based on the difference between the segment boundary verification result in the current round of segment boundary feedback parameters and the target segment boundary verification result, as well as the changing trend of the current round of segment boundary verification result relative to the previous round of segment boundary verification result, update the segment boundary risk weight;

[0141] The updated segment boundary risk weights are re-input into the joint objective function, and the combined solution is executed to obtain a new current reinforcement scheme combination;

[0142] Based on the new current reinforcement scheme combination, a new reanalysis model is established and reanalysis is performed to obtain new segment boundary feedback parameters.

[0143] Repeat the above process until the boundary verification results of all boundaries are less than or equal to the target boundary verification result. For example, the target boundary verification result can be 0.8, and the change in the risk weight of the boundary between two adjacent rounds is not greater than the preset change threshold. For example, the change threshold can be 0.02, or the number of iterations reaches the preset upper limit. For example, the maximum number of iterations can be 10.

[0144] The segment boundary risk weight update satisfies:

[0145] ;

[0146] in, and These represent the segment boundary risk weights of segment boundary e in round k and round k+1, respectively. This represents the segment boundary check result of segment boundary e in the k-th round. This indicates the dimensionless target segment boundary verification result. and This indicates the preset update coefficient, for example, It can be set to 0.5, used to correct the difference between the current wheel segment boundary verification result and the target segment boundary verification result. It can be set to 0.2, used to correct the trend of change in the segment boundary verification results between the current round and the previous round. This means truncating the result to 0-1.

[0147] This formula indicates that if the current boundary check result is higher than the target boundary check result, it means that the deformation control of the boundary under the current reinforcement scheme combination is too tight, and the risk weight needs to be increased to better suppress the stiffness difference on both sides of the boundary in the next round of joint solution; if the current boundary check result is lower than the target boundary check result, it means that the boundary still has a margin, and the risk weight can be appropriately reduced; at the same time, if the current boundary check result is further increased compared to the previous round, the change trend term will further increase the risk weight, and vice versa.

[0148] The trend of the segment boundary check results satisfies: ;

[0149] in, This represents the maximum change in the risk weights of all segments between round k and round k+1.

[0150] Specifically, the current round of boundary verification results, the previous round of boundary verification results, and the current round of boundary risk weights are read from each boundary. Then, the risk weights for the next round of boundary verifications are updated based on the "difference between the current round of boundary verification results and the target boundary verification results" and the "change in the current round of boundary verification results relative to the previous round," and the updated results are truncated to between 0 and 1. The updated boundary risk weights are then re-entered into step S6 to generate a new current reinforcement scheme combination, and then sent to step S7 for re-analysis to obtain new boundary feedback parameters.

[0151] Continue to determine whether the current round of segment boundary verification results for all segment boundaries are not greater than the target segment boundary verification results, and whether the maximum change in risk weight between two adjacent rounds of segment boundaries is not greater than the preset change threshold; if both conditions are met, stop the iteration and output the current reinforcement scheme combination as the segmented reinforcement scheme; otherwise, continue to the next round of iteration.

[0152] Example: Taking section boundary 12 and section boundary 13 in a certain integrated utility tunnel project as an example, the results of the third round of section boundary verification are 0.083 and 0.920, respectively, and the risk weights of the third round of section boundaries are 0.373 and 0.612, respectively. The results of the previous round of section boundary verification are 0.095 and 0.880, respectively. If the target section boundary verification result is 0.80, and the update coefficients are 0.50 and 0.20, then the risk weights of the fourth round of section boundaries after the update are approximately 0.012 and 0.680, respectively. Based on this, steps S6 and S7 are re-executed, and in subsequent iterations, segmented reinforcement schemes that meet all section boundary verification requirements and whose risk weight changes are stable are gradually output.

[0153] Through the above technical solution, this application solves the problem that the risk weight of the segment boundary cannot converge in time during the automatic design of underground structures, which leads to the inability to achieve the best balance in the optimization of reinforcement scheme. By analyzing the feedback parameters of the segment boundary and combining the target threshold and the preset update coefficient, the risk weight of the segment boundary is dynamically corrected. This can not only improve the constraint strength of high-risk segment boundaries, but also avoid excessive constraints on low-risk segment boundaries. At the same time, through iterative updates, it is ensured that the final output reinforcement scheme can achieve a balance between overall optimization and continuity constraints while meeting the segment boundary verification requirements. Finally, the segmented reinforcement scheme that meets the convergence conditions is output.

[0154] Example 2:

[0155] like Figure 2 As shown, this application provides a parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization system for underground structures, which is applied to underground structure design schemes divided into multiple segments along a route. It is used to implement the aforementioned parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization method for underground structures, including:

[0156] The data acquisition module 100 is used to acquire segment data, segment boundary data, load condition data and corresponding initial internal force data of each segment. The segment boundary data is the cross-sectional data at the connection boundary between adjacent segments.

[0157] The scheme construction module 200 is used to enumerate and verify the segmented data based on preset reinforcement type parameters and constraint parameters to generate a set of reinforcement schemes.

[0158] The segment demand calculation module 300 is used to perform internal force envelope processing on each segment based on the initial internal force data and load condition data, and perform normalization processing in combination with the segment data to obtain the segment demand parameters of each segment.

[0159] The benchmark scheme determination and intra-segment margin calculation module 400 is used to perform intra-segment verification and cost evaluation on each reinforcement scheme in the reinforcement scheme set based on the initial internal force data, obtain evaluation parameters, and determine the benchmark reinforcement scheme for each segment and the intra-segment margin value characterizing the remaining adjustment capacity of the segment based on the evaluation parameters.

[0160] The risk weight calculation module 500 is used to perform normalized weighted calculations on the benchmark reinforcement scheme, segment demand parameters and preset segment boundary allowable deformation threshold of two adjacent segments based on preset weight coefficients, so as to obtain the segment boundary risk weight.

[0161] The scheme combination construction module 600 is used to construct a joint objective function based on evaluation parameters, intra-segment surplus values ​​and segment boundary risk weights under the constraint of adjacent segment relationships, and perform combination solution on the set of reinforcement schemes to obtain the current reinforcement scheme combination.

[0162] The feedback parameter processing module 700 is used to establish a reanalysis model based on the current reinforcement scheme combination, and perform reanalysis processing in combination with load case data to obtain the segment boundary feedback parameters that characterize the segment boundary stress and segment boundary verification results.

[0163] The reinforcement scheme output module 800 is used to update the segment boundary risk weight based on the segment boundary feedback parameters, and repeatedly execute the combined solution and the reanalysis process based on the updated segment boundary risk weight until the preset convergence condition is met, and output the segmented reinforcement scheme.

[0164] The system proposed in this embodiment belongs to the same inventive concept as the parameterized intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization method for underground structures proposed in the above embodiments. Technical details not described in detail in this embodiment can be found in the above embodiments, and this embodiment has the same beneficial effects as the above embodiments.

[0165] The technical scope of this invention is not limited to the content described above. Those skilled in the art can make various modifications and variations to the above embodiments without departing from the technical concept of this invention, and all such modifications and variations should fall within the protection scope of this invention.

Claims

1. A parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization method for underground structures, applied to the design scheme of underground structures divided into multiple segments along a route, characterized in that... include: Acquire segment data, segment boundary data, load condition data, and corresponding initial internal force data for each segment. The segment boundary data is the cross-sectional data at the connection boundary between adjacent segments. The segment boundary data includes at least the segment boundary number, the preceding segment number, the following segment number, the joint type, and the allowable deformation threshold. Based on preset reinforcement type parameters and constraint parameters, the segmented data is enumerated and constraint verification is performed to generate a set of reinforcement schemes. Based on the initial internal force data and load condition data, internal force envelope processing is performed on each segment, and normalization processing is performed in combination with the segment data to obtain the segment requirement parameters of each segment. Based on the initial internal force data, the reinforcement schemes in the set of reinforcement schemes are checked and cost evaluated within each segment to obtain evaluation parameters. Based on the evaluation parameters, the benchmark reinforcement scheme for each segment and the segment margin value characterizing the remaining adjustment capacity of the segment are determined. Based on preset weighting coefficients, the baseline reinforcement schemes, segment demand parameters, and preset allowable deformation thresholds of two adjacent segments are normalized and weighted to obtain the segment boundary risk weights. Under the constraint of adjacent segmentation relationship, a joint objective function is constructed based on evaluation parameters, intra-segment surplus value and segment boundary risk weight, and a combination solution is performed on the set of reinforcement schemes to obtain the current reinforcement scheme combination. A reanalysis model is established based on the current reinforcement scheme combination, and a reanalysis process is performed in combination with load case data to obtain the segment boundary feedback parameters that characterize the segment boundary stress and segment boundary check results. The segment boundary risk weight is updated based on the segment boundary feedback parameters, and the combined solution and the reanalysis process are repeated based on the updated segment boundary risk weight until the preset convergence condition is met, and the segmented reinforcement scheme is output. The process of obtaining the segment requirement parameters for each segment specifically includes: Based on the bending moment results corresponding to each load condition in the load case data, the bending moment control value is obtained by extracting the maximum absolute value of each segment. ; Based on the shear force results corresponding to each load condition in the load condition data, the maximum absolute value is extracted in segments to obtain the shear force control value. ; Based on the cross-sectional height of the segmented data and Calculate the crack sensitivity requirement value ; Crack sensitivity requirement value satisfied: ; For segmentation , and Normalization and truncation are performed separately to obtain the segment requirement parameters for the segments; The process of performing intra-segment verification and cost assessment on each reinforcement scheme in the set of reinforcement schemes based on initial internal force data to obtain evaluation parameters specifically includes: Based on the initial internal force data, the utilization rate of bending moment bearing capacity, shear force bearing capacity and crack control capacity of the reinforcement scheme are calculated. The maximum value among the moment bearing capacity utilization rate, shear bearing capacity utilization rate, and crack control utilization rate is taken as the intra-segment verification result of the reinforcement scheme; The amount of steel reinforcement is calculated based on the reinforcement scheme, and the cost assessment results are calculated in combination with the number of reinforcement layers and the markings for the use of large-diameter steel reinforcement. The cost assessment results meet the following requirements: ; in, Indicates the segmented reinforcement scheme The cost assessment results Indicates the segmented reinforcement scheme Dimensionless steel reinforcement usage Indicates the segmented reinforcement scheme The number of reinforcement layers, Indicates the segmented reinforcement scheme Large-diameter steel bars are marked. and Indicates the preset weighting coefficient; The intra-segment verification results and cost assessment results are used together as evaluation parameters; The process of determining the baseline reinforcement scheme for each segment and the intra-segment margin value characterizing the remaining adjustment capacity of the segment based on evaluation parameters specifically includes: Based on the evaluation parameters of the reinforcement scheme, the reinforcement schemes with verification results within the segment that are less than or equal to the preset maximum utilization rate threshold are selected, and the reinforcement scheme with the lowest cost evaluation result is selected as the benchmark reinforcement scheme for that segment. Calculate the residual value within the segment based on the segment check results of the benchmark reinforcement scheme, and perform truncation processing on the residual value within the segment; The remaining value within the segment satisfies: ; in, This represents the remaining value within each segment. Indicates the segmented reference reinforcement scheme The results of the segment verification Indicates truncation; The process of obtaining the risk weights of each segment boundary specifically includes: Calculate the stiffness difference sub-parameters based on the benchmark reinforcement scheme of adjacent segments; The stiffness difference sub-parameter satisfies: ; in, This represents the stiffness difference sub-parameter at the boundary connecting adjacent segments. and These represent the baseline reinforcement schemes for adjacent segments on both sides of the segment boundary, where K represents the equivalent flexural stiffness. Calculate the demand difference sub-parameters based on the segment demand parameters of adjacent segments; The demand difference sub-parameters satisfy: ; in, This indicates the sub-parameter representing the difference in requirements at the boundary between adjacent segments. and The segment requirement parameters represent adjacent segments; Calculate the threshold-sensitive sub-parameter based on the allowable deformation threshold of the segment boundary; The threshold-sensitive sub-parameter satisfies: ; in, This represents the threshold-sensitive sub-parameter. This indicates the minimum allowable deformation threshold value for the segment boundary. This indicates the allowable deformation threshold for the segment boundary. Indicates the preset seam type coefficient; The stiffness difference sub-parameter, demand difference sub-parameter, and threshold sensitivity sub-parameter are weighted and fused based on preset weight coefficients to obtain the segment boundary risk weight. The process of obtaining the segment boundary feedback parameters, which characterize the segment boundary force and segment boundary verification results, specifically includes: Based on the equivalent flexural stiffness corresponding to the segments in the current reinforcement scheme, establish a reanalysis model along the line; Based on the load case data, internal force solutions are performed on the reanalysis model to obtain the end bending moments of the segment boundary under various load cases. The maximum absolute value of the end bending moment at both ends of the section boundary under each working condition is taken to obtain the control value of the end bending moment of the section boundary. The predicted opening of the segment boundary is calculated based on the bending moment control value at the end of the segment boundary, the equivalent bending stiffness corresponding to the current reinforcement scheme, the preset influence length ratio, and the section height at the segment boundary, which characterizes the degree of deformation at the boundary. The segment boundary verification results are calculated based on the predicted segment boundary opening and the allowable segment boundary deformation threshold. The boundary check results meet the following requirements: ; in, This indicates the result of the boundary check. This indicates the allowable deformation threshold for the segment boundary. This indicates that the segment boundary is predicted to open. Indicates truncation; The end moment control value of the segment boundary and the verification result of the segment boundary after truncation are used as the segment boundary feedback parameters.

2. The parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization method for underground structures according to claim 1, characterized in that, The process of obtaining the current reinforcement scheme combination specifically includes: The cost item is constructed based on the cost assessment results of the reinforcement scheme; Based on the degree of deviation of the reinforcement scheme from the benchmark reinforcement scheme, and combined with the intra-segment allowance value of the corresponding segment, a benchmark deviation item is constructed. Based on the differences between adjacent segment reinforcement schemes, and combined with the segment boundary risk weights of the corresponding segments, an incompatibility term is constructed. A joint objective function is constructed based on the cost term, the benchmark deviation term, and the incompatibility term, and a combination solution is performed on the set of reinforcement schemes to obtain the current reinforcement scheme combination. The joint objective function satisfies: ； in, This represents the joint objective function value. Indicates the segmented reinforcement scheme The equivalent bending stiffness, This represents the baseline reinforcement scheme for the segmented sections. This represents the residual value within a segment. Indicates a preset positive number. The segment boundary risk weight represents the segment boundary. and This indicates the preset weighting coefficient. Indicates the deviation from the benchmark. This indicates the incompatibility level.

3. The parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization method for underground structures according to claim 2, characterized in that, The process of segment boundary prediction and opening calculation specifically includes: First, calculate the influence length of adjacent segments on both sides of the segment boundary: , ; in, and These represent the influence lengths of adjacent segments on both sides of the segment boundary. This indicates the preset influence length ratio. and These represent the lengths of adjacent segments respectively; Next, the curvature proxy of adjacent segments on both sides of the segment boundary is calculated: , in, and These represent the curvature proxies of adjacent segments on both sides of the segment boundary. and These represent the end bending moment control values ​​of adjacent segments on both sides of the segment boundary. and These represent the equivalent flexural stiffness of adjacent segments in the current reinforcement scheme; Finally, based on the length of influence , and curvature proxy , Calculate segment boundary prediction opening: ; in, The segment boundary prediction indicates that the segment boundary has opened. This represents half the height of the cross section at the segment boundary.

4. The parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization method for underground structures according to claim 3, characterized in that, The process of updating the segment boundary risk weight based on the segment boundary feedback parameters, and repeating the combined solution and reanalysis based on the updated segment boundary risk weights, specifically includes: Based on the difference between the segment boundary verification result in the current round of segment boundary feedback parameters and the target segment boundary verification result, as well as the changing trend of the current round of segment boundary verification result relative to the previous round of segment boundary verification result, update the segment boundary risk weight; The updated segment boundary risk weights are re-input into the joint objective function, and the combined solution is executed to obtain a new current reinforcement scheme combination; Based on the new current reinforcement scheme combination, a new reanalysis model is established and reanalysis is performed to obtain new segment boundary feedback parameters. Repeat the above process until the boundary verification results of all boundaries are less than or equal to the target boundary verification result, and the change in the risk weight of the boundary between two adjacent rounds is not greater than the preset threshold, or the number of iterations reaches the preset upper limit. The segment boundary risk weight update satisfies: ； in, and These represent the segment boundary risk weights in round k and round k+1, respectively. This indicates the segment boundary check result in the k-th round. This indicates the result of the target segment boundary verification. and This indicates the preset update coefficient.

5. A parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization system for underground structures, applied to the design scheme of underground structures divided into multiple segments along a route, characterized in that... The method for implementing parametric intelligent design and automatic reinforcement optimization of underground structures as described in any one of claims 1-4 includes: The data acquisition module is used to acquire segment data, segment boundary data, load condition data and corresponding initial internal force data for each segment. The segment boundary data is the cross-sectional data at the boundary between adjacent segments. The segment boundary data includes at least the segment boundary number, the preceding segment number, the following segment number, the joint type and the allowable deformation threshold. The scheme construction module is used to enumerate and verify the segmented data based on preset reinforcement type parameters and constraint parameters to generate a set of reinforcement schemes. The segment demand calculation module is used to perform internal force envelope processing on each segment based on initial internal force data and load condition data, and perform normalization processing in combination with segment data to obtain the segment demand parameters of each segment. The module for determining the baseline scheme and calculating the intra-segment margin is used to perform intra-segment verification and cost evaluation on each reinforcement scheme in the set of reinforcement schemes based on the initial internal force data, obtain evaluation parameters, and determine the baseline reinforcement scheme for each segment and the intra-segment margin value characterizing the remaining adjustment capacity of the segment based on the evaluation parameters. The risk weight calculation module is used to perform normalized weighted calculations on the benchmark reinforcement scheme, segment demand parameters, and preset segment boundary allowable deformation threshold of two adjacent segments based on preset weight coefficients, so as to obtain the segment boundary risk weight. The scheme combination construction module is used to construct a joint objective function based on evaluation parameters, intra-segment surplus values ​​and segment boundary risk weights under the constraint of adjacent segment relationships, and perform combination solution on the set of reinforcement schemes to obtain the current reinforcement scheme combination. The feedback parameter processing module is used to establish a reanalysis model based on the current reinforcement scheme combination, and perform reanalysis processing in combination with load case data to obtain the segment boundary feedback parameters that characterize the segment boundary stress and segment boundary verification results. The reinforcement scheme output module is used to update the segment boundary risk weight based on the segment boundary feedback parameters, and repeatedly execute the combined solution and the reanalysis process based on the updated segment boundary risk weight until the preset convergence condition is met, and output the segmented reinforcement scheme. The process of obtaining the segment requirement parameters for each segment specifically includes: Based on the bending moment results corresponding to each load condition in the load case data, the bending moment control value is obtained by extracting the maximum absolute value of each segment. ; Based on the shear force results corresponding to each load condition in the load condition data, the maximum absolute value is extracted in segments to obtain the shear force control value. ; Based on the cross-sectional height of the segmented data and Calculate the crack sensitivity requirement value ; Crack sensitivity requirement value satisfied: ; For segmentation , and Normalization and truncation are performed separately to obtain the segment requirement parameters for the segments; The process of performing intra-segment verification and cost assessment on each reinforcement scheme in the set of reinforcement schemes based on initial internal force data to obtain evaluation parameters specifically includes: Based on the initial internal force data, the utilization rate of bending moment bearing capacity, shear force bearing capacity and crack control capacity of the reinforcement scheme are calculated. The maximum value among the moment bearing capacity utilization rate, shear bearing capacity utilization rate, and crack control utilization rate is taken as the intra-segment verification result of the reinforcement scheme; The amount of steel reinforcement is calculated based on the reinforcement scheme, and the cost assessment results are calculated in combination with the number of reinforcement layers and the markings for the use of large-diameter steel reinforcement. The cost assessment results meet the following requirements: ; in, Indicates the segmented reinforcement scheme The cost assessment results Indicates the segmented reinforcement scheme Dimensionless steel reinforcement usage Indicates the segmented reinforcement scheme The number of reinforcement layers, Indicates the segmented reinforcement scheme Large-diameter steel bars are marked. and Indicates the preset weighting coefficient; The intra-segment verification results and cost assessment results are used together as evaluation parameters; The process of determining the baseline reinforcement scheme for each segment and the intra-segment margin value characterizing the remaining adjustment capacity of the segment based on evaluation parameters specifically includes: Based on the evaluation parameters of the reinforcement scheme, the reinforcement schemes with verification results within the segment that are less than or equal to the preset maximum utilization rate threshold are selected, and the reinforcement scheme with the lowest cost evaluation result is selected as the benchmark reinforcement scheme for that segment. Calculate the residual value within the segment based on the segment check results of the benchmark reinforcement scheme, and perform truncation processing on the residual value within the segment; The remaining value within the segment satisfies: ; in, This represents the remaining value within each segment. Indicates the segmented reference reinforcement scheme The results of the segment verification Indicates truncation; The process of obtaining the risk weights of each segment boundary specifically includes: Calculate the stiffness difference sub-parameters based on the benchmark reinforcement scheme of adjacent segments; The stiffness difference sub-parameter satisfies: ; in, This represents the stiffness difference sub-parameter at the boundary connecting adjacent segments. and These represent the baseline reinforcement schemes for adjacent segments on both sides of the segment boundary, where K represents the equivalent flexural stiffness. Calculate the demand difference sub-parameters based on the segment demand parameters of adjacent segments; The demand difference sub-parameters satisfy: ; in, This indicates the sub-parameter representing the difference in requirements at the boundary between adjacent segments. and The segment requirement parameters represent adjacent segments; Calculate the threshold-sensitive sub-parameter based on the allowable deformation threshold of the segment boundary; The threshold-sensitive sub-parameter satisfies: ; in, This represents the threshold-sensitive sub-parameter. This indicates the minimum allowable deformation threshold value for the segment boundary. This indicates the allowable deformation threshold for the segment boundary. Indicates the preset seam type coefficient; The stiffness difference sub-parameter, demand difference sub-parameter, and threshold sensitivity sub-parameter are weighted and fused based on preset weight coefficients to obtain the segment boundary risk weight. The process of obtaining the segment boundary feedback parameters, which characterize the segment boundary force and segment boundary verification results, specifically includes: Based on the equivalent flexural stiffness corresponding to the segments in the current reinforcement scheme, establish a reanalysis model along the line; Based on the load case data, internal force solutions are performed on the reanalysis model to obtain the end bending moments of the segment boundary under various load cases. The maximum absolute value of the end bending moment at both ends of the section boundary under each working condition is taken to obtain the control value of the end bending moment of the section boundary. The predicted opening of the segment boundary is calculated based on the bending moment control value at the end of the segment boundary, the equivalent bending stiffness corresponding to the current reinforcement scheme, the preset influence length ratio, and the section height at the segment boundary, which characterizes the degree of deformation at the boundary. The segment boundary verification results are calculated based on the predicted segment boundary opening and the allowable segment boundary deformation threshold. The boundary check results meet the following requirements: ; in, This indicates the result of the boundary check. This indicates the allowable deformation threshold for the segment boundary. This indicates that the segment boundary is predicted to open. Indicates truncation; The end moment control value of the segment boundary and the verification result of the segment boundary after truncation are used as the segment boundary feedback parameters.

Images