A reusable foundation pit support member selection method

Abstract

The application discloses a reusable foundation pit supporting member selection method applied to a foundation pit supporting member selection platform. The method acquires support row selection task information, determines loading sequence information of a plurality of support positions in a target foundation pit support row and member response sequence information of candidate supporting members; generates candidate arrangement items according to the plurality of support positions and the candidate supporting members; determines response sequence constraint relationships between adjacent candidate arrangement items in combination with the loading sequence information and the member response sequence information; screens a target member combination meeting the response sequence constraint relationships and position limitation conditions from the candidate arrangement items, and outputs member selection information. The method can also update the response sequence constraint relationships according to on-site response sequence information and redetermine the member selection information, thereby reducing the risk of adjacent arrangement conflicts of the reusable supporting members caused by unmatched response sequences.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application relates to the field of foundation pit support construction management technology, and in particular to a method for selecting reusable foundation pit support components. Background Technology

[0002] In foundation pit support engineering, support components such as steel supports, flexible ends, adjusting sections, connecting nodes, and waler connectors are typically used to limit the deformation of the retaining structure and transfer the support reaction force during the foundation pit excavation process. With the increasing requirements for prefabricated construction and green construction, these support components can be dismantled, recycled, repaired, and registered after the completion of one project, and then reused in other foundation pit support projects.

[0003] Reusable support components differ from newly manufactured standard components. During repeated installation, preloading, locking, unloading, dismantling, and transportation, reusable support components may develop end indentations, gaps in adjusting sections, differences in the fit of connecting surfaces, localized wear at the movable ends, or sluggish force transmission. These conditions do not necessarily lead to the component being directly deemed unusable in individual component testing, but they may affect the sequence of responses when the component is loaded together with adjacent components within the support row.

[0004] The selection of existing foundation pit support components typically relies on factors such as support span, component length, interface type, load-bearing capacity, and individual component testing results to determine component usability. While this approach addresses component specification matching, for multiple reusable support components within the same support row, even if multiple individual components meet the foundation requirements, differences in contact closure timing, stable force transmission timing, or axial force stabilization timing during adjacent arrangement and progressive loading can still lead to inconsistent response sequences.

[0005] For example, if the old active end at the preceding load support position is still in the gap closing stage, while another old component at the subsequent load support position has already formed an effective force transmission state, local force transmission may occur prematurely or delayed within the same support row. This could increase the risk of secondary axial force distribution, delayed local support response, or uneven stress on the support row. Therefore, existing methods still require a selection method that can correlate and determine the response sequence information of reusable support components with the loading sequence of the target foundation pit support row. Summary of the Invention

[0006] This application provides a method for selecting reusable foundation pit support components, which reduces the possibility of adjacent arrangement conflicts arising from mismatched response order of multiple individually qualified old components in the same support row during the selection process of reusable support components.

[0007] Firstly, this application provides a method for selecting reusable foundation pit support components, which can be executed by a foundation pit support component selection platform. In this method, the foundation pit support component selection platform acquires support row selection task information. This support row selection task information is used to instruct the selection of reusable support components for multiple support positions in a target foundation pit support row. The support row selection task information includes loading sequence information for the multiple support positions and component response sequence information for candidate support components. The foundation pit support component selection platform generates candidate arrangement items based on the multiple support positions and the candidate support components. Each candidate arrangement item represents the correspondence between a candidate support component and a support position. The foundation pit support component selection platform determines adjacent candidate support components based on the loading sequence information and the component response sequence information. The platform establishes a response order constraint relationship between the selected layout items, which indicates whether adjacent candidate layout items are allowed to exist simultaneously in the same target component combination. The platform determines at least one target component combination from the candidate layout items. Each target component combination includes target layout items corresponding to the plurality of support locations, and each target component combination satisfies the response order constraint relationship. The platform outputs component selection information corresponding to the at least one target component combination, which indicates the correspondence between reusable support components in the target component combination and the plurality of support locations.

[0008] In the above method, the foundation pit support component selection platform acquires the support row selection task information for selecting support row components, and generates candidate arrangement items between candidate support components and support locations. Then, based on the loading sequence information of the target foundation pit support row and the component response sequence information of the candidate support components, it determines whether adjacent candidate arrangement items are allowed to exist simultaneously in the same target component combination, and outputs the correspondence between the target component combination and multiple support locations. In this way, the selection process no longer judges the usability of a component solely based on component specifications, load-bearing capacity, or the test results of a single component. Instead, it associates the response sequence of candidate support components with the loading sequence and adjacent arrangement relationships within the support row. This allows for the early elimination of component combinations that meet the requirements individually but may result in conflicting response sequences after combination, which is beneficial for improving the reliability of reusable foundation pit support component combination selection.

[0009] In one possible design, the component response sequence information includes low-load response sequence information, which is obtained by: performing a low-load trial loading on the candidate support component; during the low-load trial loading process, recording the contact closure sequence, low-load stiffness change sequence, and axial force stabilization sequence corresponding to the candidate support component transitioning from the initial contact state to the stable force transmission state; and generating the low-load response sequence information of the candidate support component based on the contact closure sequence, the low-load stiffness change sequence, and the axial force stabilization sequence. Through this design, the low-load response sequence information does not merely indicate whether a component can be loaded, but reflects the sequential process of the component from contact, closure, force transmission to stability during the low-load trial loading process, which is beneficial for subsequent judgment of whether there are inconsistencies in the response sequence among multiple existing components.

[0010] In one possible design, recording the contact closure sequence corresponding to the candidate support component transitioning from the initial contact state to the stable force transmission state includes: acquiring the loading displacement and axial force changes of the candidate support component during multiple low-load loading stages; determining the stage where the loading displacement changes but the axial force does not reach the effective force transmission condition as the gap closure stage; determining the stage where the axial force reaches the effective force transmission condition and meets the stability condition during the load holding period as the stable force transmission stage; and determining the contact closure sequence of the candidate support component based on the sequential relationship between the gap closure stage and the stable force transmission stage. This design transforms the initial idle stroke or delayed force transmission process caused by factors such as end indentations, adjustment section gaps, and insufficient contact surface fit in reusable components into a contact closure sequence that can be used for selection, avoiding the need to judge its suitability solely based on the nominal length or nominal stroke of the component.

[0011] In one possible design, determining the response order constraint relationship between adjacent candidate arrangement items based on the loading sequence information and the component response sequence information includes: determining the response propagation relationship between adjacent support positions based on the loading order relationship of adjacent support positions in the target foundation pit support row, wherein the response propagation relationship is used to represent the loading dependency relationship between the preceding and subsequent loaded support positions in adjacent support positions; determining whether there is a response lag conflict between corresponding adjacent candidate arrangement items based on the response propagation relationship and the component response sequence information; when the response lag conflict exists, determining that the corresponding adjacent candidate arrangement items are not allowed to exist simultaneously in the same target component combination; when the response lag conflict does not exist, determining that the corresponding adjacent candidate arrangement items are allowed to exist simultaneously in the same target component combination. Through this design, the loading sequence of the support row can be correlated with the actual response process of the candidate support components, so that the adjacency relationship between candidate arrangement items is determined by response process constraints, rather than by individual component scoring or manual experience.

[0012] In one possible design, the response hysteresis conflict includes at least one of the following: when the candidate support member corresponding to the preceding load support position has not reached a stable force transmission state, the candidate support member corresponding to the subsequent load support position has reached an effective force transmission condition; the difference in the contact closure stage of two candidate support members corresponding to adjacent support positions exceeds a preset adjacent allowable range; the axial force stabilization sequence of two candidate support members corresponding to adjacent support positions is inconsistent with the loading sequence; at least one of the two candidate support members corresponding to adjacent support positions is marked as having an unstable contact state during trial loading or historical testing. This design allows for the identification of response conflicts between adjacent components from multiple process states such as contact closure, stable force transmission, and axial force stabilization, without requiring a weighted scoring method to determine whether the component combination is suitable for arrangement.

[0013] In one possible design, generating candidate layouts based on the plurality of support locations and the candidate support components includes: obtaining basic adaptation conditions for the plurality of support locations, the basic adaptation conditions including at least one of length range, interface type, and load-bearing capacity; determining candidate support components that meet the adaptation requirements of the corresponding support locations from a library of reusable support components based on the basic adaptation conditions; and generating the candidate layouts based on the candidate support components that meet the basic adaptation conditions and their corresponding support locations. This design allows for basic specification adaptation to be completed before forming candidate layouts, preventing components that clearly do not meet the basic requirements of the support locations from entering subsequent combination screening.

[0014] In one possible design, determining at least one target component combination from the candidate arrangement items includes: establishing a component arrangement relationship table based on the plurality of support locations and the candidate support components, the component arrangement relationship table indicating whether each candidate support component can be arranged at the corresponding support location; generating a plurality of candidate component combinations based on the component arrangement relationship table, each candidate component combination including candidate arrangement items corresponding to the plurality of support locations respectively; deleting candidate component combinations containing adjacent candidate arrangement items that are not allowed to exist simultaneously from the plurality of candidate component combinations according to the response order constraint relationship; and determining the remaining candidate component combinations as the target component combination. This design uses a relationship table and constraint filtering method to determine the target component combination, avoiding the output of component combinations that are not allowed to be arranged adjacently as selection results.

[0015] In one possible design, the method further includes: obtaining the location risk level of the plurality of support locations, the location risk level being determined based on at least one of the surrounding environmental sensitivity of the corresponding support location, the layer where the support row is located, and the design preload axial force requirement; classifying the candidate support components into at least one of sequentially stable components, response-hysteresis components, and contact-unstable components based on the component response sequence information; setting location constraints on the candidate support components based on the location risk level and the classification result of the candidate support components, the location constraints indicating whether the corresponding candidate support component is allowed to be arranged at a support location of the corresponding risk level; and determining at least one target component combination from the candidate arrangement items, including: determining the at least one target component combination from candidate component combinations that simultaneously satisfy the response sequence constraint relationship and the location constraint condition. This design combines the response sequence constraints between candidate components with the risk level constraints of the support location itself, preventing components with response hysteresis or contact instability from being arranged in high-risk support locations.

[0016] In one possible design, the component selection information includes at least one of the following: the component number corresponding to each reusable support component in the target component combination; the support position corresponding to each reusable support component; adjacent permitted components corresponding to each reusable support component; adjacent prohibited components corresponding to each reusable support component; the recommended loading sequence corresponding to the target component combination; and verification prompt information corresponding to the target component combination. Through this design, the output component selection information not only indicates the correspondence between components and support positions but also prompts adjacent arrangement restrictions and loading verification requirements, facilitating component allocation and installation verification on the construction site according to the selection results.

[0017] In one possible design, after outputting the component selection information corresponding to the at least one target component combination, the method further includes: obtaining the on-site response sequence information of the target component combination during the on-site trial fitting process; comparing the on-site response sequence information with the component response sequence information; when the difference between the on-site response sequence information and the component response sequence information meets a preset update condition, updating the response sequence constraint relationship according to the on-site response sequence information; and redetermining the component selection information corresponding to the target component combination based on the updated response sequence constraint relationship. This design allows for updating the response sequence constraint relationship and regenerating component selection information when the difference between the on-site trial fitting data and the pre-selection response data reaches an update condition, enabling the selection results to be corrected based on the actual on-site response. Attached Figure Description

[0018] The accompanying drawings, which form part of this application, are used to provide a further understanding of this application. The illustrative embodiments of this application and their descriptions are used to explain this application and do not constitute an undue limitation of this application.

[0019] Figure 1 A schematic diagram of the architecture of a foundation pit support component selection platform provided in an embodiment of this application; Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the support position of a target foundation pit support row provided in an embodiment of this application; Figure 3 A flowchart illustrating a method for selecting reusable foundation pit support components, provided in an embodiment of this application; Figure 4 This application provides a schematic diagram of a component response sequence information generation process. Figure 5 This is a schematic diagram illustrating a candidate layout item generation process provided in an embodiment of this application; Figure 6 This application provides a schematic diagram of a response order constraint relationship. Figure 7 This application provides a schematic representation of the arrangement relationship of components. Figure 8 This is a schematic diagram of a target component combination screening process provided in an embodiment of this application; Figure 9 A schematic diagram illustrating the correspondence between location risk level and location restrictions provided for embodiments of this application; Figure 10 This is a schematic diagram of a field response sequence information update process provided in an embodiment of this application. Detailed Implementation

[0020] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of the embodiments of this application clearer, the embodiments of this application will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings. In the description of the embodiments of this application, the terms "first," "second," etc., are used for descriptive purposes only and should not be construed as indicating or implying relative importance, nor should they be construed as implicitly specifying the number of indicated technical features. Therefore, a feature defined with "first" or "second" may explicitly or implicitly include one or more of that feature.

[0021] It should be understood that in the embodiments of this application, "at least one" means one or more, and "more than one" means two or more. "And / or" describes the relationship between related objects, indicating that three relationships can exist. For example, A and / or B can represent the existence of A alone, the simultaneous existence of A and B, or the existence of B alone, where A and B can be singular or plural. The character " / " generally indicates that the preceding and following related objects are in an "or" relationship. "At least one of the following" or similar expressions refer to any combination of these items, including any combination of single or plural items.

[0022] See Figure 1 , Figure 1 This illustration shows an architectural diagram of a foundation pit support component selection platform provided in an embodiment of this application. The foundation pit support component selection platform in this embodiment can be a server, a construction management platform, an engineering selection platform, a field computing terminal, or a platform implemented collaboratively by a server and a terminal. This foundation pit support component selection platform can receive foundation pit support design information, component ledger information, component response sequence information, and field verification information, and output the correspondence between reusable support components and support locations based on the above information. It is understood that this embodiment does not limit the specific product form of the foundation pit support component selection platform, as long as it can execute the component selection method provided in this embodiment.

[0023] The reusable support components in this application embodiment may include at least one of steel supports, flexible ends, adjusting sections, connecting nodes, and waler connectors. Candidate support components may be components that have been recycled, repaired, registered, and prepared for reuse in foundation pit support projects. Candidate support components may be imported by users, uploaded by field terminals, provided by third-party testing systems, or determined by a foundation pit support component selection platform from a reusable support component library.

[0024] See Figure 2 , Figure 2 This illustration shows a schematic diagram of the arrangement of multiple support positions in a target foundation pit support row. In this embodiment, the target foundation pit support row may include multiple support positions arranged along the same support layer, or multiple support positions within the same construction section that require pre-applied axial force in a predetermined loading sequence. The loading sequence information indicates the order in which the multiple support positions are applied during the pre-applied axial force process.

[0025] The component response sequence information in this application embodiment is used to represent the sequential response states of candidate support components formed during loading, testing, trial fitting, or historical construction records. The component response sequence information may include at least one of the following: contact closure sequence, force transmission state formation sequence, axial force stability sequence, response hysteresis marker, and contact instability marker. The component response sequence information may include low-load response sequence information, historical preloading response sequence information, or field response sequence information. Low-load response sequence information is a specific form of component response sequence information.

[0026] In one example, the component response sequence information can be represented by a component response record table. The component response record table may include at least one of the following: component number, response source, contact closure stage identifier, effective force transmission stage identifier, stable force transmission stage identifier, axial force stabilization stage identifier, and response status label. The response source may include low-load trial fitting, historical preloading records, historical inspection records, or on-site verification records; the contact closure stage identifier indicates the stage where the candidate support component completes gap closure; the effective force transmission stage identifier indicates the stage where the candidate support component begins to form an effective force transmission state; the stable force transmission stage identifier indicates the stage where the candidate support component enters a stable force transmission state; the axial force stabilization stage identifier indicates the stage where the axial force change of the candidate support component meets the stability condition; and the response status label may include at least one of the following: sequential stability, response lag, contact instability, and requiring on-site verification.

[0027] For example, the component response sequence information of candidate support component A can be represented as follows: component number A, response source is low-load trial fitting, contact closure stage is the first low-load loading stage, effective force transmission stage is the second low-load loading stage, stable force transmission stage is the second low-load loading stage, axial force stabilization stage is the third low-load loading stage, and the response status label is "sequentially stable". The component response sequence information of candidate support component B can be represented as follows: component number B, response source is historical preloading record, contact closure stage is the second low-load loading stage, effective force transmission stage is the third low-load loading stage, stable force transmission stage is the third low-load loading stage, axial force stabilization stage is the third low-load loading stage, and the response status label is "response hysteresis". The component response sequence information of candidate support component C can be represented as follows: component number C, response source is historical detection record, contact closure stage is unstable, stable force transmission stage is unstable, and the response status label is "contact unstable".

[0028] Through the aforementioned component response record table, the foundation pit support component selection platform can unify response data from different sources into comparable response sequence information. For data from low-load trial fitting, the platform can directly use loading stage identifiers to indicate the order of responses; for data from historical preloading records or historical testing records, the platform can convert the response conclusions in the historical records into response status labels; for data from on-site verification records, the platform can update the contact closure sequence, effective force transmission stage, or axial force stabilization stage formed during on-site verification into the component response record table.

[0029] Low-load response sequence information can be used to represent the sequential states of contact closure, low-load stiffness change, and axial force stabilization of candidate support components during low-load trial loading. Low-load response sequence information can be represented by stage numbers, time sequence identifiers, or state labels. For example, low-load response sequence information can indicate that a candidate support component is in the gap closure stage during the first low-load loading stage, enters the effective force transmission process during the second low-load loading stage, and reaches a stable force transmission state during the third low-load loading stage.

[0030] In this application's embodiments, a candidate arrangement item can represent the correspondence between a candidate support member and a support position. For example, a candidate arrangement item can represent that candidate support member A is arranged at the first support position, or candidate support member B is arranged at the second support position. Adjacent candidate arrangement items can represent that the support positions corresponding to two candidate arrangement items are adjacent in the target foundation pit support row. The response order constraint relationship can be used to indicate whether two adjacent candidate arrangement items are allowed to exist simultaneously in the same target component combination.

[0031] The effective force transmission condition in this embodiment can be determined based on the correspondence between axial force change and loading displacement change. When the loading displacement continues to increase and the axial force increases continuously accordingly, the candidate support component can be considered to have entered the effective force transmission process. The effective force transmission condition can also be determined based on the axial force relative to the target axial force reached in the current loading stage. The stability condition can be determined based on whether the axial force fluctuation during the loading period is within a preset stability range. The preset stability range can be determined based on the accuracy of the testing equipment, engineering testing standards, historical trial fitting data of similar components, or preset standards of the construction unit.

[0032] In some embodiments, the effective force transmission condition can be: during the same loading stage, the loading displacement of the candidate support member continues to increase and the axial force rises continuously, without any instance of the axial force falling back to the level corresponding to the previous loading stage. The stability condition can be: during the loading period, the axial force variation of the candidate support member is within the fluctuation range determined by the accuracy of the testing equipment, the component testing standard, or the preset standard of the construction unit.

[0033] The preset adjacent allowable range and preset update conditions in this application embodiment can be determined based on the foundation pit support design documents, component testing procedures, historical trial data of similar components, or preset standards of the construction unit. In different projects, the above ranges can be adjusted according to the support row position, design pre-applied axial force requirements, accuracy of testing equipment, and sensitivity of the surrounding environment. This application embodiment does not limit the specific values.

[0034] For example, the preset adjacent allowable range can be represented by the difference in loading stages. When the difference in loading stages corresponding to two adjacent candidate support members entering a stable force transmission state exceeds the set stage difference, it can be considered that the difference in contact closure stages exceeds the preset adjacent allowable range. As another example, the preset adjacent allowable range can be represented by the difference in response state labels. When a candidate support member has entered a stable force transmission state, while its adjacent candidate support member is still in the gap closure stage, it can be considered that there is a response difference between the two that exceeds the preset adjacent allowable range.

[0035] For example, preset update conditions may include at least one of the following: the on-site contact closure sequence differs from the contact closure sequence recorded before selection; the on-site axial force stability sequence differs from the axial force stability sequence recorded before selection; the on-site response state changes from sequential stability to response lag or contact instability; or a new response lag conflict occurs between adjacent components on-site. These preset update conditions can be pre-set by the construction unit according to testing procedures, design requirements, or on-site verification requirements.

[0036] The following describes a method for selecting reusable foundation pit support components according to an embodiment of this application. See also... Figure 3 , Figure 3 The illustration shows a flowchart of a reusable foundation pit support component selection method provided in an embodiment of this application. This method can be executed by a foundation pit support component selection platform, by a server within the platform, or by a combination of the server and a field terminal.

[0037] S301: The foundation pit support component selection platform obtains support row selection task information. The support row selection task information is used to indicate the selection of reusable support components for multiple support locations within the target foundation pit support row. This information may include the project number, construction section number, support layer number, location numbers of multiple support locations, loading sequence information for multiple support locations, component numbers of candidate support components, and component response sequence information for candidate support components. The support row selection task information may also include at least one of the following: support span, interface type, design preload axial force requirement, allowable length range of components, component load-bearing capacity, and component reuse log information.

[0038] In some embodiments, the foundation pit support component selection platform can receive support row selection task information sent by design-end equipment, construction management terminal, or component testing terminal. In other embodiments, the foundation pit support component selection platform can also respond to user operations in the selection interface, obtain the target foundation pit support row and candidate support components selected by the user, and generate support row selection task information based on the design information corresponding to the target foundation pit support row and the testing information corresponding to the candidate support components.

[0039] In some embodiments, the component response sequence information can be generated from low-load trial loading. In other embodiments, the component response sequence information can also be generated from historical component inspection records, historical preloading records, or on-site verification records. The foundation pit support component selection platform can obtain component response sequence information from any of the above sources.

[0040] In one embodiment of historical response information, the foundation pit support component selection platform can obtain historical preloading response records of candidate support components in at least one historical foundation pit project. The historical preloading response records may include at least one of the following: component number, historical project number, historical support location, preloading sequence, contact closure state, stable force transmission state, axial force stability state, and on-site verification conclusion. The foundation pit support component selection platform can determine the historical preloading response sequence information of candidate support components based on the historical preloading response records and use this historical preloading response sequence information as the component response sequence information.

[0041] For example, if candidate support component A reaches a stable force transmission state after adjacent components in both historical projects, and there are no repeated changes in the contact state, the foundation pit support component selection platform can mark candidate support component A as a component with lag in response. As another example, if candidate support component B experiences an interruption in the axial force stability state during the overload holding phase in historical projects, or is marked as having repeatedly changed contact states in the field verification records, the foundation pit support component selection platform can mark candidate support component B as a component with unstable contact. The marking of these components with lag in response and unstable contact can be used to subsequently determine the response order constraint relationship between adjacent candidate layout items.

[0042] In another embodiment of historical response information, the foundation pit support component selection platform can convert historical preloading response records into status tags. For example, candidate support components that complete contact closure and axial force stabilization in the loading sequence during historical preloading are marked as sequentially stable components; candidate support components that can enter a stable force transmission state during historical preloading but enter the state later than adjacent components are marked as response-lagging components; and candidate support components that exhibit repeated changes in contact state, interruption of axial force stabilization, or inability to maintain a stable force transmission state during the loading holding phase are marked as contact-unstable components. This status tag can serve as a way to express the component response sequence information.

[0043] In one example, when the component response sequence information comes from historical preloading response records, the foundation pit support component selection platform can prioritize historical records that have the same or similar support component type, loading method, or preload axial force level as the current target foundation pit support row. For example, if the current target foundation pit support row uses a combination of steel supports and movable ends, and is loaded using a graded preloading method, the foundation pit support component selection platform can prioritize calling historical project records that also use a combination of steel supports and movable ends and are loaded using a graded preloading method.

[0044] In one example, if the engineering conditions corresponding to the historical records are similar to the current target foundation pit support row, the foundation pit support component selection platform can use the contact closure stage, effective force transmission stage, stable force transmission stage, and axial force stabilization stage in the historical records as the component response sequence information. If the engineering conditions corresponding to the historical records differ from the current target foundation pit support row, such as the support layer, pre-applied axial force level, or loading method of the historical project being different from the current project, the foundation pit support component selection platform may not directly use the specific loading stage number in the historical records, but only use the response status label in the historical records as restrictive information. The response status label includes at least one of the following: response lag label, contact instability label, or label requiring on-site verification.

[0045] For example, candidate support component D was placed in the second support in historical project one, using a graded preloading method, and records show that it entered a stable force transmission state after the adjacent components; in historical project two, it was placed in the first support, and records show that it still entered a stable force transmission state later than the adjacent components. If the current project also uses a graded preloading method, the foundation pit support component selection platform can mark candidate support component D as a component with a lag response. If the current project uses a different loading method, the foundation pit support component selection platform can mark candidate support component D as a component requiring on-site verification and restrict its placement in high-risk support locations when determining the target component combination.

[0046] For example, candidate support component E experienced an interruption in the axial force stability state during the loading and holding phase in a historical project, but the support layer and pre-applied axial force level of that historical project were higher than those of the current project. In this case, the foundation pit support component selection platform can choose not to directly determine that candidate support component E is unusable. Instead, it can set its response status label to "contact unstable" or "requires on-site verification." When determining the response sequence constraints, it can set the candidate layout combination that includes candidate support component E and corresponds to a high-risk support location to be disallowed from existing simultaneously, or set it to require on-site verification before it can be used.

[0047] In this way, historical response information is not simply equivalent to current project response information. Instead, it is used as specific response stage information, response status labels, or on-site verification prompts, depending on the degree of matching between historical project conditions and current support row conditions. This avoids distortion in the judgment of component response order due to differences between historical and current project conditions.

[0048] S302: The foundation pit support component selection platform obtains the low-load response sequence information of candidate support components. (See [link]) Figure 4 , Figure 4 This illustrates a process for generating component response sequence information: In one implementation, the foundation pit support component selection platform can directly read the low-load response sequence information of candidate support components from the component testing database. The component testing database can store the contact closure sequence, low-load stiffness change sequence, and axial force stability sequence formed by each candidate support component during the low-load trial fitting process. This method is suitable for scenarios where candidate support components have already completed low-load trial fitting tests.

[0049] In another embodiment, the foundation pit support component selection platform can receive low-load loading data uploaded by low-load testing equipment and generate low-load response sequence information based on the low-load loading data. The low-load loading data may include at least one of the following: loading displacement change, axial force change, loading holding time, component end contact state, and stable force transmission state of the candidate support component in multiple low-load loading stages.

[0050] In one optional implementation, the low-load fitting equipment can perform low-load fitting on candidate support components. This low-load fitting may include multiple loading stages. For example, the low-load fitting equipment can apply loads to the candidate support components in ascending order, and record the changes in load displacement and axial force of the candidate support components at each loading stage. The foundation pit support component selection platform can determine the contact closure sequence, low-load stiffness change sequence, and axial force stabilization sequence corresponding to the candidate support component transitioning from the initial contact state to the stable force transmission state based on the changes in load displacement and axial force during multiple loading stages.

[0051] For example, when a candidate support component experiences significant displacement changes during a certain loading stage, but the axial force has not yet reached the effective force transmission condition, the foundation pit support component selection platform can identify this stage as the gap closure stage. This gap closure stage can correspond to processes such as gap elimination at the movable end, gap elimination at the adjusting section, contact surface mating, or contact adjustment of the end indentation area. When the axial force of the candidate support component reaches the effective force transmission condition in a subsequent loading stage and meets the stability condition during the loading maintenance process, the foundation pit support component selection platform can identify this stage as the stable force transmission stage. The foundation pit support component selection platform can determine the contact closure sequence of the candidate support component based on the sequential relationship between the gap closure stage and the stable force transmission stage.

[0052] For example, candidate support component A completes gap closure in the first low-load loading stage and enters a stable force transmission state in the second low-load loading stage; candidate support component B completes gap closure in the second low-load loading stage and enters a stable force transmission state in the third low-load loading stage. The foundation pit support component selection platform can determine that the contact closure sequence of candidate support component A precedes that of candidate support component B, and that the axial force stabilization sequence of candidate support component A precedes that of candidate support component B. The above example is only used to illustrate the process of generating low-load response sequence information and is not intended to limit the number of specific loading stages or the loading ratio.

[0053] In a specific judgment example, if a candidate support component shows a situation where the loaded displacement continues to increase but the axial force does not increase continuously in the first low-load loading stage, the foundation pit support component selection platform can determine the first low-load loading stage as the gap closure stage; if the axial force of the candidate support component increases continuously with the loaded displacement in the second low-load loading stage and does not show a significant drop during the loading period, the foundation pit support component selection platform can determine the second low-load loading stage as the stable force transmission stage; if the axial force of the candidate support component can still remain stable in the third low-load loading stage, the foundation pit support component selection platform can mark it as a sequentially stable component.

[0054] In another specific judgment example, if candidate support component C shows significant changes in load displacement but the axial force does not reach the effective force transmission condition in both the first and second low-load loading stages, and only enters a stable force transmission state in the third low-load loading stage, while candidate support component D in the same target pit support row has completed gap closure in the first low-load loading stage and entered a stable force transmission state in the second low-load loading stage, then the pit support component selection platform can determine that candidate support component C has a response lag relative to candidate support component D.

[0055] In another specific judgment example, if candidate support member E enters the effective force transmission process during the first low-load loading stage, but the axial force state is repeatedly interrupted during the loading period, or the contact state regresses to the gap closure state in the subsequent loading stage, then the foundation pit support member selection platform can mark candidate support member E as a contact unstable member. This contact unstable mark can be used as part of the member response sequence information for determining the subsequent response sequence constraint relationship.

[0056] S303: The foundation pit support component selection platform generates candidate layout items based on multiple support locations and candidate support components. See [link / reference] Figure 5 , Figure 5 This illustrates one process for generating candidate layout items: In this embodiment, the foundation pit support component selection platform can generate candidate layout items based on multiple support locations and candidate support components. Each candidate layout item represents the correspondence between a candidate support component and a support location. For example, the first candidate layout item can represent candidate support component A being arranged at the first support location, and the second candidate layout item can represent candidate support component B being arranged at the second support location.

[0057] In some embodiments, the foundation pit support component selection platform can first generate candidate layouts that meet the foundation adaptation conditions based on the foundation adaptation conditions at the support location and the component parameters of the candidate support components. For example, if candidate support component A meets the length range, interface type, and load-bearing capacity requirements of the first support location, then a candidate layout for candidate support component A corresponding to the first support location can be generated. If candidate support component A does not meet the interface type requirements of the second support location, then no candidate layout for candidate support component A corresponding to the second support location will be generated.

[0058] Optionally, the basic adaptation conditions may include at least one of length range, interface type, and load-bearing capacity. The foundation pit support component selection platform can determine candidate support components that meet the adaptation requirements of the corresponding support location from the reusable support component library based on the basic adaptation conditions, and generate candidate layout items based on the candidate support components that meet the basic adaptation conditions and the corresponding support locations.

[0059] S304: The foundation pit support component selection platform determines the response order constraint relationship between adjacent candidate layout items based on loading sequence information and component response sequence information; see also Figure 6 , Figure 6 The response order constraints between adjacent candidate placement items are shown: In this embodiment, the loading sequence information can represent the loading order relationship among multiple support positions in the target foundation pit support row. The foundation pit support component selection platform can determine the response transmission relationship between adjacent support positions based on the loading order relationship. The response transmission relationship can indicate that the force transmission stability state of the preceding loaded support position affects the loading process of the subsequent loaded support position, or it can indicate that the loading process of the subsequent loaded support position may have a reverse effect on the axial force stability state of the preceding loaded support position.

[0060] The foundation pit support component selection platform can determine whether there are response lag conflicts between adjacent candidate arrangements based on response propagation relationships and component response sequence information. If a response lag conflict exists, the platform can determine that the corresponding adjacent candidate arrangements are not allowed to coexist in the same target component combination. If no response lag conflict exists, the platform can determine that the corresponding adjacent candidate arrangements are allowed to coexist in the same target component combination.

[0061] In one example, the response sequence constraint relationship can be represented by a response sequence constraint relationship table. The response sequence constraint relationship table may include at least one of the following: a first candidate arrangement item, a second candidate arrangement item, adjacent support position relationships, loading sequence relationships, response conflict types, and constraint results. Specifically, the first and second candidate arrangement items represent the correspondence between a candidate support member and a support position; the adjacent support position relationship indicates whether the support positions corresponding to two candidate arrangement items are adjacent; the loading sequence relationship indicates the loading order of the two support positions; the response conflict type indicates the type of response hysteresis conflict that exists between two candidate arrangement items; and the constraint result indicates whether two candidate arrangement items are allowed to coexist in the same target member combination.

[0062] For example, candidate arrangement X represents candidate support member A positioned at the first support location, and candidate arrangement Y represents candidate support member B positioned at the second support location. The first and second support locations are adjacent, and the first support location is loaded before the second support location. If candidate support member A only enters a stable force transmission state in the third low-load loading stage, while candidate support member B has already reached the effective force transmission condition in the second low-load loading stage, then the response conflict type can be determined as a lag in force transmission of the preceding loaded member, and the constraint result can be determined as not allowing both to exist simultaneously.

[0063] For example, candidate arrangement term M indicates that candidate support member C is arranged at the second support position, and candidate arrangement term N indicates that candidate support member D is arranged at the third support position. The second and third support positions are adjacent, and the second support position is loaded before the third support position. If both candidate support member C and candidate support member D enter a stable force transmission state during the second low-load loading stage, and neither of them is marked as a contact unstable state, then the response conflict type can be empty, and the constraint result can be determined as allowing simultaneous existence.

[0064] For example, candidate arrangement item P represents candidate support member E located at the first support position, and candidate arrangement item Q represents candidate support member F located at the second support position. If candidate support member F is marked as an unstable contact member in historical testing, and the second support position is a high-risk support position, then the response conflict type can be determined as an unstable contact conflict, and the constraint result can be determined as either not allowed to exist simultaneously or requiring on-site verification. If the engineering configuration requires that unstable contact members not be used at high-risk support positions, then the constraint result can be "not allowed to exist simultaneously"; if the engineering configuration allows for use after on-site verification, then the constraint result can be "requires on-site verification".

[0065] In another example, response order constraints can also be represented using a constraint matrix. The rows and columns of the constraint matrix correspond to candidate arrangement items, and the matrix elements represent the constraint results between two candidate arrangement items. If a matrix element is an allow flag, it means that the corresponding two candidate arrangement items are allowed to coexist in the same target component combination; if a matrix element is a prohibit flag, it means that the corresponding two candidate arrangement items are not allowed to coexist in the same target component combination; if a matrix element is a verification flag, it means that the corresponding two candidate arrangement items need to be verified before on-site trial fitting or installation to determine whether they are allowed to coexist.

[0066] By using a response sequence constraint table or constraint matrix, the foundation pit support component selection platform can transform loading sequence information, component response sequence information, and adjacent arrangement relationships into executable combination screening conditions, thereby eliminating candidate arrangement combinations with inconsistent response sequences before generating the target component combination.

[0067] In some embodiments, the response hysteresis conflict may include at least one of the following: First, when the candidate support member corresponding to the preceding load support position has not reached a stable force transmission state, the candidate support member corresponding to the subsequent load support position has reached the effective force transmission condition. Second, the difference in the contact closure phase between two candidate support members corresponding to adjacent support positions exceeds a preset adjacent allowable range. Third, the axial force stabilization sequence of two candidate support members corresponding to adjacent support positions is inconsistent with the loading sequence. Fourth, at least one of the two candidate support members corresponding to adjacent support positions is marked as having an unstable contact state during trial loading or historical testing.

[0068] For example, the target foundation pit support array includes a first support position, a second support position, and a third support position loaded sequentially. Candidate arrangement item X represents candidate support component A positioned at the first support position, and candidate arrangement item Y represents candidate support component B positioned at the second support position. If candidate support component B has completed contact closure and entered the effective force transmission process, while candidate support component A is still in the gap closure stage, the foundation pit support component selection platform can determine that there is a response hysteresis conflict between candidate arrangement item X and candidate arrangement item Y, and mark candidate arrangement item X and candidate arrangement item Y as not allowed to coexist in the same target component combination.

[0069] In a specific judgment example, the first support position is loaded before the second support position. Candidate arrangement item X represents candidate support component A placed at the first support position, and candidate arrangement item Y represents candidate support component B placed at the second support position. If candidate support component A only enters a stable force transmission state in the third low-load loading stage, while candidate support component B has already reached the effective force transmission condition in the second low-load loading stage, the foundation pit support component selection platform can determine that there is a response lag conflict between candidate arrangement item X and candidate arrangement item Y. In this case, even if candidate support component A and candidate support component B each meet the requirements for length range, interface type, and load-bearing level, candidate arrangement item X and candidate arrangement item Y are not allowed to exist simultaneously in the same target component combination.

[0070] In another specific judgment example, the first support position and the second support position are adjacent, and both candidate support component C and candidate support component D can enter a stable force transmission state. However, the loading stage at which candidate support component C enters a stable force transmission state differs from that of candidate support component D by more than the preset adjacent allowable range. In this case, the foundation pit support component selection platform can determine that there is a response lag conflict between the two corresponding adjacent candidate layout items.

[0071] In another specific judgment example, the first support position is loaded before the second support position. Candidate support component E is arranged at the first support position, and candidate support component F is arranged at the second support position. If candidate support component F is marked as an unstable contact component in historical testing, the foundation pit support component selection platform can, according to the engineering configuration rules, mark the adjacent arrangement relationship between candidate support component F and a high-risk position in either the first or second support position as prohibited, or mark the combination of adjacent candidate arrangement items containing candidate support component F as requiring review.

[0072] S305: The foundation pit support component selection platform determines at least one target component combination from the candidate layout items. In one optional implementation, the foundation pit support component selection platform can establish a component layout relationship table based on multiple support locations and candidate support components; see [link to relevant documentation]. Figure 7 , Figure 7 This diagram illustrates one form of a component layout relationship table. This table indicates whether each candidate support component can be placed at its corresponding support location. For example, a record in the table may include support location number, candidate support component number, specification matching result, interface matching result, length matching result, and whether placement is permitted. The specification matching result, interface matching result, and length matching result can be determined by the foundation pit support component selection platform based on the support span, interface type, component length range, and component load-bearing capacity in the support selection task information.

[0073] See Figure 8 , Figure 8 This demonstrates a screening process for target component combinations. The foundation pit support component selection platform can generate multiple candidate component combinations based on a component layout relationship table. Each candidate component combination includes candidate layout items corresponding to multiple support locations, and each support location corresponds to one candidate layout item within the same candidate component combination. The same candidate support component can correspond to only one support location within the same candidate component combination to avoid the duplicate allocation of the same physical component.

[0074] The foundation pit support component selection platform can delete candidate component combinations containing adjacent candidate arrangement items that are not allowed to exist simultaneously from multiple candidate component combinations based on response order constraints. This deletion can be achieved by marking the corresponding candidate component combination as prohibited, invalid, or unselectable, or by skipping the corresponding combination when generating candidate component combinations; this embodiment does not limit this approach. The foundation pit support component selection platform can then determine the remaining candidate component combinations after deletion as the target component combinations.

[0075] For example, the target foundation pit support row includes three support locations, and the candidate support components include component A, component B, component C, and component D. The foundation pit support component selection platform can first establish a component layout relationship table based on the support locations and candidate support components, and then delete candidate component combinations that contain "adjacent candidate layout items that are not allowed to exist simultaneously" according to the response order constraint relationship. If the combination "component A—first support location, component C—second support location, component D—third support location" satisfies that each support location corresponds to one component, the same component is not used repeatedly, and there are no conflicts between adjacent candidate layout items, then this combination can be determined as the target component combination.

[0076] In one example, the target foundation pit support row includes a first support position, a second support position, and a third support position, and the loading order is the first support position, the second support position, and the third support position. The reusable support component library includes candidate support component A, candidate support component B, candidate support component C, and candidate support component D. The foundation pit support component selection platform generates candidate layout items X1, X2, Y1, Y2, Z1, and Z2 based on the basic adaptation conditions of each support position. Wherein, X1 represents candidate support component A arranged at the first support position, X2 represents candidate support component B arranged at the first support position, Y1 represents candidate support component B arranged at the second support position, Y2 represents candidate support component C arranged at the second support position, Z1 represents candidate support component C arranged at the third support position, and Z2 represents candidate support component D arranged at the third support position.

[0077] The foundation pit support component selection platform can first generate candidate component combinations based on candidate layout items. For example, candidate component combination one includes X1, Y1, and Z1; candidate component combination two includes X1, Y2, and Z2; and candidate component combination three includes X2, Y2, and Z1. Each candidate component combination includes candidate layout items corresponding to the first support position, the second support position, and the third support position, respectively. If the same physical component corresponds to two support positions repeatedly in the same candidate component combination, the foundation pit support component selection platform can delete the candidate component combination or not generate it.

[0078] The foundation pit support component selection platform then determines whether candidate component combinations can be retained based on the response order constraints. For example, if records X1 and Y1 in the response order constraint table are not allowed to exist simultaneously, then candidate component combination one containing X1 and Y1 is deleted; if records Y2 and Z2 in the response order constraint table are allowed to exist simultaneously, and X1 and Y2 are also allowed to exist simultaneously, then candidate component combination two can be retained; if X2 and Y2 included in candidate component combination three are allowed to exist simultaneously, but Y2 and Z1 require on-site verification, then the foundation pit support component selection platform can mark candidate component combination three as a combination to be verified.

[0079] In one example, the foundation pit support component selection platform can prioritize outputting candidate component combinations that are retained and do not require review, as target component combinations; when there are no candidate component combinations that fully satisfy the constraints, the foundation pit support component selection platform can output combinations to be reviewed and their review prompts; when all candidate component combinations contain adjacent candidate arrangement items that are not allowed to exist simultaneously, the foundation pit support component selection platform can output a prompt indicating insufficient candidate components, or prompt to add candidate support components, adjust the loading order of support positions, or re-perform low-load trial loading.

[0080] Through the above combination screening process, the foundation pit support component selection platform does not simply score and rank the candidate support components, but deletes candidate component combinations that do not meet the constraints based on whether the candidate layout items are allowed to coexist. This ensures that the output target component combination meets the requirements in terms of component-location correspondence and adjacent response order.

[0081] S306: The platform for selecting foundation pit support components determines the target component combination based on the location and risk level; see also Figure 9 , Figure 9 This illustrates a correspondence between location risk levels and location restrictions: In some embodiments, the foundation pit support component selection platform can also obtain the location risk level of multiple support locations. The location risk level can be determined based on at least one of the following: the sensitivity of the surrounding environment of the corresponding support location, the floor level where the support row is located, and the design preload axial force requirement. For example, support locations near existing buildings, underground pipelines, roads, subway sections, or other sensitive structures can be identified as high-risk support locations; support locations located in ordinary construction sections with general design preload axial force requirements can be identified as ordinary support locations; and support locations located in temporary support sections or with relatively low deformation control requirements can be identified as low-risk support locations.

[0082] The foundation pit support component selection platform can classify candidate support components into at least one of the following categories based on component response sequence information: sequentially stable components, response-lag components, and contact-unstable components. Sequentially stable components are those whose contact closure sequence, low-load stiffness change sequence, and axial force stabilization sequence are consistent with the low-load trial loading process, and do not exhibit significant hysteresis or abrupt changes. Response-lag components are those capable of forming a stable force transmission state, but whose entry into the stable force transmission state is relatively delayed. Contact-unstable components are those whose contact state repeatedly changes during loading, whose axial force stabilization state is discontinuous, or whose contact closure phase is difficult to stably identify.

[0083] For example, a candidate support member can be labeled as a sequentially stable member when it can sequentially complete gap closure, effective force transmission, and axial force stabilization in multiple low-load loading stages, and there is no state regression during the axial force stabilization stage. A candidate support member can enter a stable force transmission state, but its gap closure stage or axial force stabilization stage lags behind the corresponding stage of adjacent candidate members within the same support row, and this delayed state does not meet the elimination criteria. A candidate support member can be labeled as a contact-unstable member when its contact state repeatedly changes, its axial force stabilization state is interrupted, or it cannot maintain a stable force transmission state within the same loading stage.

[0084] The foundation pit support component selection platform can set location restrictions for candidate support components based on the location risk level and the classification results. Location restrictions indicate whether a candidate support component is allowed to be placed at a support location corresponding to its risk level. For example, sequentially stable components can be set to be allowed at high-risk, normal, and low-risk support locations; hysteresis-response components can be set to be disallowed at high-risk support locations; and contact-unstable components can be set to be disallowed at high-risk and normal support locations, or removed from the candidate support component pool.

[0085] The foundation pit support component selection platform can determine at least one target component combination from candidate component combinations that simultaneously satisfy response sequence constraints and location limitations. In this way, whether a candidate support component can be placed at a certain support location depends not only on its specifications and load-bearing capacity, but also on the matching relationship between its response sequence status and the risk level of that support location.

[0086] S307: The foundation pit support component selection platform outputs component selection information corresponding to at least one target component combination. In this embodiment of the application, the component selection information may include at least one of the following: the component number corresponding to each reusable support component in the target component combination, the support position corresponding to each reusable support component, the adjacent permitted components corresponding to each reusable support component, the adjacent prohibited components corresponding to each reusable support component, the recommended loading order corresponding to the target component combination, and the review prompt information corresponding to the target component combination.

[0087] In some embodiments, the foundation pit support component selection platform can output component selection information in the form of tables, lists, construction task sheets, component allocation sheets, or electronic construction diagram annotations. For example, the component selection information can be displayed as follows: the first support position corresponds to component A, the second support position corresponds to component C, and the third support position corresponds to component D; component A is allowed to be arranged adjacent to component C, but not adjacent to component B; it is recommended that the target component combination be loaded in the order of the first support position, the second support position, and the third support position; the axial force stability order of component C needs to be verified during on-site trial assembly.

[0088] S308: The foundation pit support component selection platform updates component selection information based on the on-site trial fitting process; see also Figure 10 , Figure 10 This illustrates a process for updating on-site response sequence information: In one optional implementation, after the foundation pit support component selection platform outputs component selection information corresponding to at least one target component combination, the platform can also acquire the field response sequence information of the target component combination during the field trial assembly process. The field response sequence information may include the contact closure sequence, low-load stiffness change sequence, and axial force stabilization sequence formed by the target support components in the target component combination during the field trial assembly or installation preloading process.

[0089] The foundation pit support component selection platform can compare the on-site response sequence information with the component response sequence information. If the difference between the on-site response sequence information and the component response sequence information does not meet the preset update conditions, the platform can retain the output component selection information. If the difference between the on-site response sequence information and the component response sequence information meets the preset update conditions, the platform can update the response sequence constraints based on the on-site response sequence information and redetermine the component selection information corresponding to the target component combination based on the updated response sequence constraints.

[0090] The preset update conditions may include at least one of the following: the on-site contact closure sequence is different from the contact closure sequence before selection; the on-site axial force stability sequence is different from the axial force stability sequence before selection; the on-site response state changes from sequential stability to response lag or contact instability; new response lag conflicts occur between adjacent components on-site.

[0091] For example, a target component combination may be determined to have no adjacent arrangement conflicts before selection. However, during on-site trial assembly, the target support component corresponding to the preceding load support position enters the stable force transmission state later than the target support component corresponding to the subsequent load support position enters the effective force transmission process. In this case, the foundation pit support component selection platform can update the adjacent arrangement relationship between the two corresponding target arrangement items to a state where simultaneous existence is not allowed based on the on-site response sequence information, and re-determine the target component combination from the candidate arrangement items.

[0092] It should be noted that the sources of component response sequence information, the number of stages of low-load trial loading, the number of risk levels of support locations, the classification names of candidate support components, and the display format of component selection information in the above embodiments are all examples and do not constitute a limitation on the scope of protection of this application. In other embodiments, the foundation pit support component selection platform can also adjust the above content according to engineering management requirements, component testing conditions, and support row loading process.

[0093] In this embodiment, the foundation pit support component selection platform can be implemented by a server alone, or by a server and a field terminal working together. For example, the server can be used to store component response sequence information, establish response sequence constraints, and determine the target component combination; the field terminal can be used to collect on-site response sequence information and send it to the server. Alternatively, the field terminal can also execute some or all of the above selection steps locally. This embodiment does not limit this approach.

Claims

1. A method for selecting reusable foundation pit support components, characterized in that, The method, applied to a platform for selecting foundation pit support components, includes: Obtain support row selection task information, which is used to indicate the selection of reusable support components for multiple support positions in the target foundation pit support row. The support row selection task information includes the loading order information of the multiple support positions and the component response order information of the candidate support components. Candidate arrangement items are generated based on the multiple support locations and the candidate support components. The candidate arrangement items are used to represent the correspondence between a candidate support component and a support location. Based on the loading order information and the component response order information, the response order constraint relationship between adjacent candidate arrangement items is determined. The response order constraint relationship is used to indicate whether adjacent candidate arrangement items are allowed to exist simultaneously in the same target component combination. At least one target component combination is determined from the candidate arrangement items, each target component combination includes target arrangement items corresponding to the plurality of support positions respectively, and each target component combination satisfies the response order constraint relationship; Output component selection information corresponding to the at least one target component combination, wherein the component selection information is used to indicate the correspondence between the reusable support components in the target component combination and the plurality of support positions.

2. The method for selecting reusable foundation pit support components as described in claim 1, characterized in that, The component response sequence information includes low-load response sequence information, which is obtained through the following methods: Low-load trial fitting was performed on the candidate support components; During the low-load trial loading process, the contact closing sequence, low-load stiffness change sequence, and axial force stabilization sequence of the candidate support components when they enter the stable force transmission state from the initial contact state are recorded. Based on the contact closure sequence, the low-load stiffness change sequence, and the axial force stabilization sequence, the low-load response sequence information of the candidate support components is generated.

3. The method for selecting reusable foundation pit support components as described in claim 2, characterized in that, The recording of the contact closure sequence corresponding to the candidate support component entering the stable force transmission state from the initial contact state includes: The loading displacement and axial force changes of the candidate support components were obtained during multiple low-load loading stages; The stage in which the loaded displacement changes but the axial force does not reach the effective force transmission condition is defined as the gap closure stage; The stage in which the axial force reaches the effective force transmission condition and meets the stability condition during the loading period is defined as the stable force transmission stage. The contact closure sequence of the candidate support components is determined based on the sequential relationship between the gap closure phase and the stable force transmission phase.

4. The method for selecting reusable foundation pit support components as described in claim 3, characterized in that, The step of determining the response order constraint relationship between adjacent candidate arrangement items based on the loading order information and the component response order information includes: Based on the loading sequence of adjacent support positions in the target foundation pit support row, the response transmission relationship between adjacent support positions is determined. The response transmission relationship is used to represent the loading dependency relationship between the preceding and subsequent load support positions in adjacent support positions. Based on the response transmission relationship and the component response sequence information, it is determined whether there is a response lag conflict between the corresponding adjacent candidate arrangement items; When the aforementioned response lag conflict exists, the corresponding adjacent candidate arrangements are determined to be not allowed to exist simultaneously in the same target component combination; In the absence of the aforementioned response lag conflict, the corresponding adjacent candidate arrangements are determined to be allowed to coexist in the same target component combination.

5. The method for selecting reusable foundation pit support components as described in claim 4, characterized in that, The response lag conflict includes at least one of the following: When the candidate support component corresponding to the previous loading support position has not reached a stable force transmission state, the candidate support component corresponding to the subsequent loading support position has reached an effective force transmission condition. The difference in the contact closure phase between two candidate support members corresponding to adjacent support positions exceeds the preset adjacent allowable range; The axial force stabilization order of two candidate support components corresponding to adjacent support positions is inconsistent with the loading order; At least one of the two candidate support members corresponding to adjacent support locations is marked as having an unstable contact state during trial loading or historical testing.

6. The method for selecting reusable foundation pit support components as described in any one of claims 1 to 5, characterized in that, The step of generating candidate layout items based on the plurality of support locations and the candidate support components includes: Obtain the basic adaptation conditions for the multiple support locations, wherein the basic adaptation conditions include at least one of length range, interface type, and bearing level; Based on the aforementioned basic adaptation conditions, candidate support components that meet the adaptation requirements of the corresponding support positions are determined from the reusable support component library. The candidate arrangement items are generated based on the candidate support components that meet the basic adaptation conditions and their corresponding support positions.

7. The method for selecting reusable foundation pit support components as described in claim 1, characterized in that, Determining at least one target component combination from the candidate arrangements includes: Based on the multiple support locations and the candidate support components, a component arrangement relationship table is established, which is used to indicate whether each candidate support component can be arranged at the corresponding support location. Multiple candidate component combinations are generated based on the component arrangement relationship table, and each candidate component combination includes candidate arrangement items corresponding to the multiple support positions respectively; Based on the response order constraint, remove candidate component combinations that contain adjacent candidate arrangement items that are not allowed to exist simultaneously from the plurality of candidate component combinations; The candidate component combinations that are retained after deletion are determined as the target component combinations.

8. The method for selecting reusable foundation pit support components as described in claim 1, characterized in that, The method further includes: The location risk level of the multiple support locations is obtained, and the location risk level is determined based on at least one of the following: the sensitivity of the surrounding environment of the corresponding support location, the layer where the support row is located, and the design pre-applied axial force requirement; Based on the component response sequence information, the candidate support components are classified into at least one of sequentially stable components, response hysteresis components, and contact unstable components; Based on the location risk level and the classification results of the candidate support components, location restrictions are set for the candidate support components. The location restrictions are used to indicate whether the corresponding candidate support component is allowed to be arranged at the support location of the corresponding risk level. Determining at least one target component combination from the candidate arrangements includes: The at least one target component combination is determined from candidate component combinations that simultaneously satisfy the response order constraint relationship and the position constraint condition.

9. The method for selecting reusable foundation pit support components as described in claim 1, characterized in that, The component selection information includes at least one of the following: The component number corresponding to each reusable support component in the target component assembly; The support position corresponding to each reusable support component; Each reusable support member corresponds to an adjacent permissible member; Each reusable support member corresponds to an adjacent prohibited member; The recommended loading order corresponding to the target component combination; The verification prompt information corresponding to the target component combination.

10. The method for selecting reusable foundation pit support components as described in claim 1, characterized in that, After outputting the component selection information corresponding to the at least one target component combination, the method further includes: Obtain the on-site response sequence information of the target component assembly during the on-site trial assembly process; The on-site response sequence information is compared with the component response sequence information; When the difference between the on-site response sequence information and the component response sequence information meets the preset update condition, the response sequence constraint relationship is updated according to the on-site response sequence information. Based on the updated response order constraint relationship, the component selection information corresponding to the target component combination is re-determined.

Images