A complex terrain construction scheme feasibility evaluation and risk early warning method and device

Abstract

The application discloses a kind of complex terrain construction scheme feasibility evaluation and risk early warning method and device, it is related to power transmission and transformation engineering construction field, its method includes: obtaining construction scheme digital model, constructs construction dataset;Based on construction dataset, under the construction organization framework characterized by construction scheme digital model, the selectable construction mode of each construction procedure is combined, generates several initial construction schemes;Each initial construction scheme is checked with strong constraint, and the scheme that passes through checking constitutes candidate construction scheme;Each scheme in candidate construction scheme set is scored and the feasibility index is calculated, and the recommended construction scheme is determined based on the feasibility index;Risk probability and scheme deviation index are calculated;According to risk probability and scheme deviation index, combined early warning determination is carried out, if triggering early warning, then output alternative construction scheme, if not triggering, then maintain recommended construction scheme.Effectively improve the objectivity, accuracy and dynamic adaptability of construction scheme evaluation.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of power transmission and transformation engineering construction technology, and in particular to a method and device for feasibility assessment and risk warning of construction schemes in complex terrain. Background Technology

[0002] Mechanized construction of power transmission lines is a crucial component of power transmission engineering, especially in complex terrain conditions such as mountains, hills, valleys, and plateaus. The development of construction plans involves multiple stages, including the entry of machinery and equipment, the construction of temporary access roads, cableway transportation, site layout, foundation construction, and tower erection. In existing technologies, the development of mechanized construction plans for power transmission lines in complex terrain conditions typically involves designers combining topographic maps, design data, site survey results, and their own engineering experience to plan the construction route, equipment selection, transportation methods, and construction organization. During implementation, designers, based on topographic conditions and equipment performance parameters, determine the entry methods for machinery and equipment at each tower location or section, the layout of temporary access roads, the cableway transportation plan, and the specific construction methods for foundation construction and tower erection through manual analysis and judgment. A qualitative assessment of the feasibility of the construction plan is also conducted.

[0003] In practical applications, the formulation of construction plans and feasibility assessments are primarily based on qualitative analysis using human experience, lacking systematic quantitative evaluation methods for construction plans under complex terrain conditions. Due to the numerous and interdependent influencing factors under complex terrain conditions, including various terrain conditions such as slope, elevation difference, site space, road accessibility, and slope stability, as well as various meteorological conditions such as wind speed, rainfall, icing, and visibility, different designers often have differing assessments of the construction feasibility of the same tower location or section. This results in poor consistency in the evaluation results, making it difficult to establish a unified, reusable, and traceable quantitative evaluation basis. Under extreme conditions such as steep slopes, abrupt elevation changes, narrow sites, deep valleys, and proximity to cliffs or water, relying solely on human experience makes it difficult to identify potential risks and adverse constraints in a timely and accurate manner. This leads to a high degree of subjectivity and insufficient quantification in the feasibility assessment of construction plans. Summary of the Invention

[0004] This invention provides a method and apparatus for feasibility assessment and risk warning of construction schemes in complex terrain, which is used to solve the technical problems of strong subjectivity and insufficient quantification in the feasibility assessment of mechanized construction schemes for power transmission lines under complex terrain conditions.

[0005] The first aspect of this invention provides a method for feasibility assessment and risk warning of construction schemes in complex terrain, comprising: Obtain the digital model of the construction plan corresponding to the tower location to be analyzed, and integrate multi-source data to construct a construction dataset; Based on the construction dataset, under the construction organization framework represented by the digital model of the construction scheme, the optional construction methods for each construction process are combined to generate several initial construction schemes. Each initial construction plan is subjected to strong constraint verification, and the plans that pass all verifications are used to form candidate construction plans; the strong constraints include equipment capacity boundary restrictions, restricted access areas, and extreme terrain and meteorological parameter threshold restrictions; A multi-attribute evaluation index system is constructed to score each scheme in the candidate construction scheme set and calculate the feasibility index. Based on the feasibility index, the recommended construction scheme is determined. Collect real-time risk parameters and calculate risk probabilities, and combine construction progress and working condition deviation data to calculate the scheme deviation index; A joint early warning judgment is made based on the risk probability and the scheme deviation index. If an early warning is triggered, an alternative construction scheme is output; otherwise, the recommended construction scheme is maintained.

[0006] Preferably, based on the construction dataset, within the construction organization framework represented by the digital model of the construction scheme, the optional construction methods for each construction procedure are combined to generate several initial construction schemes, including: Extract the terrain environment data and equipment resource data of the current tower location from the construction dataset; Based on the terrain and equipment resource data, the optional construction methods for each construction process under the current tower location conditions are determined, forming a set of feasible methods for each process. The feasible methods for each process are arranged and combined to form multiple combination schemes that include all construction processes. Each combination scheme is an initial construction scheme.

[0007] Preferably, the equipment capability boundary restrictions, prohibited area restrictions, and extreme terrain and meteorological parameter threshold restrictions in the strong constraint verification correspond to the following verification contents: The equipment capacity boundary limits include: the width of the construction road is not less than the minimum passage width of the equipment, the slope of the construction site is not greater than the climbing capacity threshold of the equipment, the area of ​​the construction site meets the requirements for equipment layout and safe rotation, and the hoisting or tower erection operation radius does not exceed the rated operating radius of the equipment. The restrictions on prohibited areas include: the construction route must not cross ecological protection restricted areas, the construction route must not cross major geological disaster restricted areas, and the scope of construction disturbance must not exceed the prescribed construction disturbance boundaries; The threshold limits for extreme terrain and meteorological parameters include: for indicators where an increase in value leads to an increase in risk, the extreme terrain indicator shall not exceed a preset terrain threshold, and the extreme meteorological indicator shall not exceed a preset meteorological threshold; for indicators where a decrease in value leads to an increase in risk, the extreme terrain indicator shall not be lower than a preset terrain threshold, and the extreme meteorological indicator shall not be lower than a preset meteorological threshold; wherein, the indicators where an increase in value leads to an increase in risk include slope, elevation difference, site narrowness, wind speed, rainfall intensity, and icing thickness; the indicators where a decrease in value leads to an increase in risk include slope stability parameters and visibility parameters.

[0008] Preferably, the schemes that pass all verifications will constitute the candidate construction schemes, including: When an initial construction plan simultaneously meets all the constraints of the equipment capacity boundary limit, the restricted area limit, and the extreme terrain and meteorological parameter threshold limit, the initial construction plan is determined as a candidate construction plan and included in the candidate construction plan set. If an initial construction plan does not meet any constraint condition in any type of constraint, then the initial construction plan is excluded.

[0009] Preferably, the multi-attribute evaluation index system includes technical feasibility indicators, implementation timeliness indicators, resource input indicators, and environmental safety indicators; among which: The technical feasibility indicators include slope adaptability, elevation difference adaptability, road accessibility, site adaptability, equipment capacity satisfaction, and process matching. The implementation timeliness indicators include the expected construction period, the complexity of process switching, transportation efficiency, and construction continuity; The resource input indicators include road engineering volume, earthwork volume, equipment input cost, cableway construction cost, labor cost and other supporting costs; The environmental safety indicators include the area of ​​disturbance, the amount of forest impact, the degree of slope disturbance, weather sensitivity, construction safety risks, and environmental protection compliance.

[0010] Preferably, the feasibility index is calculated and each option in the candidate construction scheme set is scored, and a recommended construction scheme is determined based on the feasibility index, including: For each candidate construction scheme, calculate the values ​​of each scheme under the technical feasibility index, implementation timeliness index, resource input index and environmental safety index, and standardize each attribute value to obtain standardized attribute values. Based on the preset index weights, the standardized attribute values ​​are weighted and summed to obtain the feasibility index of each candidate construction scheme. When calculating the feasibility index, for candidate solutions that have the impact of extreme terrain or extreme weather, an extreme condition penalty term is introduced to correct the feasibility index, resulting in a corrected feasibility index. The candidate construction scheme with the highest revised feasibility index is selected as the recommended construction scheme.

[0011] Preferably, real-time risk parameters are collected and risk probabilities are calculated, including: Collect real-time risk status parameters at the current moment, and convert each real-time risk status parameter into a standardized risk value through a risk mapping function; Calculate the real-time risk score, which is represented by the weighted sum of each standardized risk value, and introduce an extreme terrain risk increment and an extreme weather risk increment on the basis of the weighted sum; The real-time risk score is mapped to a risk probability.

[0012] Preferably, the scheme deviation index is calculated by combining construction progress and working condition deviation data, including: Construct a deviation vector of the current construction status relative to the recommended construction plan. The deviation vector includes path deviation, schedule deviation, cost deviation, equipment condition deviation, and environmental disturbance deviation. Each deviation term is standardized, and the weighted sum of squares and square root of the standardized deviation terms are calculated to obtain the scheme deviation index. The path deviation, schedule deviation, cost deviation, equipment condition deviation, and environmental disturbance deviation are calculated by comparing the current actual construction status with the parameters of the corresponding plan in the recommended construction scheme.

[0013] Preferably, a joint early warning determination is made based on the risk probability and the scheme deviation index. If an early warning is triggered, an alternative construction scheme is output; if not, the recommended construction scheme is maintained, including: Set risk probability warning thresholds and deviation index warning thresholds; When the risk probability reaches or exceeds the risk probability warning threshold, or the scheme deviation index reaches or exceeds the deviation index warning threshold, it is determined that a construction scheme feasibility risk warning is triggered. After the warning is triggered, for each of the candidate construction schemes in the set, a risk penalty term and a deviation exceeding the limit penalty term are introduced on the basis of the modified feasibility index, the modified evaluation function is calculated, a comprehensive evaluation is carried out again and the schemes are sorted, and the candidate construction scheme with the best ranking is output as the alternative construction scheme. If the risk probability does not reach the risk probability warning threshold and the scheme deviation index does not reach the deviation index warning threshold, then the current recommended construction scheme will remain unchanged.

[0014] A second aspect of the present invention provides a device for feasibility assessment and risk warning of construction schemes in complex terrain, comprising: The dataset construction module is used to obtain the digital model of the construction plan corresponding to the tower location to be analyzed, and to integrate multi-source data to construct the construction dataset; Several initial construction scheme generation modules are used to combine the optional construction methods of each construction process based on the construction dataset and under the construction organization framework represented by the digital model of the construction scheme, to generate several initial construction schemes. The candidate construction scheme determination module is used to perform strong constraint verification on each initial construction scheme and to form candidate construction schemes from the schemes that pass all verifications. The strong constraints include equipment capacity boundary restrictions, restricted access areas, and extreme terrain and meteorological parameter threshold restrictions. The recommended construction scheme determination module is used to construct a multi-attribute evaluation index system, score each scheme in the candidate construction scheme set and calculate the feasibility index, and determine the recommended construction scheme based on the feasibility index. The risk probability and scheme deviation index calculation module is used to collect real-time risk parameters and calculate risk probabilities, and at the same time calculate the scheme deviation index by combining construction progress and working condition deviation data. The early warning determination module is used to make a joint early warning determination based on the risk probability and the scheme deviation index. If an early warning is triggered, an alternative construction scheme is output; otherwise, the recommended construction scheme is maintained.

[0015] As can be seen from the above technical solutions, the present invention has the following advantages: This invention provides a unified and quantitative data foundation for scheme evaluation by acquiring a digital model of the construction scheme and integrating multi-source data to construct a construction dataset. It generates an initial construction scheme by combining optional construction methods for each construction process within the construction organization framework represented by the digital model, and verifies and filters the schemes using strong constraints such as equipment capacity boundary limits, restricted access areas, and extreme terrain and meteorological parameter thresholds. This achieves systematic feasibility assessment of construction schemes under extreme terrain and weather conditions, avoiding omissions and misjudgments caused by the complex coupling of influencing factors in manual judgment. Furthermore, it scores candidate schemes and calculates feasibility indices by constructing a multi-attribute evaluation index system, incorporating multiple dimensions such as technical feasibility, implementation timeliness, resource input, and environmental safety into a unified quantitative evaluation framework. This enables comprehensive and objective comparison among multiple candidate schemes, improving the consistency and reusability of scheme evaluation results. Finally, it calculates risk probabilities by collecting real-time risk parameters and calculates scheme deviation indices by combining construction progress and working condition deviation data for joint early warning judgment. When an early warning is triggered, an alternative construction scheme is output, enhancing the timeliness of risk identification and the responsiveness of scheme adjustments during construction. This invention transforms the evaluation of mechanized construction schemes for power transmission lines under complex terrain conditions from subjective qualitative judgment to objective quantitative decision-making, effectively improving the objectivity, accuracy, and dynamic adaptability of construction scheme evaluation. Attached Figure Description

[0016] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating a method for feasibility assessment and risk warning of a construction scheme in complex terrain according to the present invention. Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram illustrating the process of generating several initial construction schemes in this invention; Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the process for determining the recommended construction scheme in this invention; Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the process for calculating the risk probability and the scheme deviation index in this invention; Figure 5 This is a schematic diagram of the joint early warning determination process in this invention. Detailed Implementation

[0017] The terms “first,” “second,” “third,” “fourth,” etc. (if present) in the specification and accompanying drawings of this application are used to distinguish similar objects and are not necessarily used to describe a specific order or sequence. It should be understood that such data can be interchanged where appropriate so that the embodiments of this application described herein can be implemented in orders other than those illustrated or described herein. Furthermore, the terms “comprising” and “corresponding to,” and any variations thereof, are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion; for example, a process, method, system, product, or apparatus that comprises a series of steps or units is not necessarily limited to those steps or units explicitly listed, but may include other steps or units not explicitly listed or inherent to such processes, methods, products, or apparatus.

[0018] The implementation method in this embodiment can be implemented in a system, on a server, or on a terminal; no specific limitation is made. The method in this application will be described below from the perspective of system implementation. Please refer to... Figure 1 The feasibility assessment and risk warning method for construction schemes in complex terrain provided in this application includes the following steps: S1. Obtain the digital model of the construction plan corresponding to the tower location to be analyzed, and integrate multi-source data to construct a construction dataset; Obtain a digital model of the construction plan corresponding to the tower location to be analyzed in the target transmission line project. This digital model refers to a data carrier that structurally expresses various information such as spatial morphology, resource occupancy status, and construction organization methods contained in the construction plan in digital form. Specifically, it is constructed based on the three-dimensional digital design results of the transmission line project, Geographic Information System (GIS) data, and construction organization design documents. This model includes at least the tower location, topography, site layout, access roads, temporary paths, cableway paths, foundation construction methods, tower erection methods, equipment configuration, material transportation methods, and the sequence of work processes. It should be noted that the digital model provides spatial morphological information of the tower location, the range of available construction resources, and a set of optional methods for each work process. Its function is to provide a spatial benchmark and construction organization framework for the subsequent generation of the construction plan. Based on the digital model, further collect and construct a multi-source dataset. The multi-source data includes at least: (1) Topographic and environmental data, including slope, aspect, elevation difference, altitude, land cover type, geomorphic unit, water system distribution, geological hazard risks, ecologically sensitive areas and construction disturbance boundaries; (2) Standard constraint data, including construction code limits, safety distance limits, equipment capacity boundaries, site layout requirements, environmental protection requirements and prohibition conditions; (3) Construction resource data, including the type of machinery and equipment, rated lifting capacity, equipment climbing ability, minimum road width, minimum turning radius, equipment operating radius, cableway applicable conditions and labor input; (4) Technical cost data, including equipment costs, road construction costs, cableway construction costs, labor costs, material transportation costs, construction period costs, and maintenance and support costs; (5) Real-time status data, including wind speed, rainfall, surface wetness, equipment operation status, construction progress status, road passability status and work area environmental status.

[0019] After the aforementioned multi-source data collection is completed, using the tower location number as the primary key and the digital model of the construction plan as the spatial reference, various attribute data are spatially registered, attribute-associated, and structured for storage, integrating them to form a unified construction dataset. This dataset then includes the input construction data set corresponding to the target tower location. Defined as: in, Indicates the first Digital model of the construction plan for each tower site Represents terrain and environmental data. Represents standard constraint data. This represents construction resource data. Represents technology cost data, This represents real-time status data.

[0020] S2. Based on the construction dataset, under the construction organization framework represented by the digital model of the construction scheme, the optional construction methods of each construction process are combined to generate several initial construction schemes. The construction organization framework refers to the structured information set represented by the digital model of the construction plan, used to organize and manage the spatial layout and logical relationships of each construction process. Specifically, it includes: tower location, site layout, access road layout, access road route, cableway route, foundation construction method type and its optional range, tower erection process type and its optional range, available equipment type and its capacity parameter range, available material transportation method type and its applicable conditions, and the temporal relationship between each process. This framework defines the range of construction methods available for each process, and the initial construction plan is generated within this framework by selecting and combining the optional methods of each process. This framework provides a spatial benchmark and organizational template for the generation of the initial construction plan. The optional methods for each construction process must be selected and combined within the spatial range and logical sequence defined by this framework. Each construction process includes at least material transportation, site layout, foundation construction, and tower erection.

[0021] Please see Figure 2 This step is achieved through the following sub-steps: S21. Extract the terrain environment data and equipment resource data of the current tower location from the construction dataset; From the above Extracting terrain and environment data Construction resource data Define the set of extreme condition identifiers. This set is a pre-defined set of judgment thresholds based on industry construction regulations, equipment capacity boundaries, and engineering safety standards, used to determine whether extreme terrain or extreme weather conditions exist at the current tower location; among them, Indicates the first The set of extreme terrain conditions corresponding to each tower location includes at least the threshold for excessive slope, the threshold for excessive elevation difference, the threshold for narrow site, the criteria for judging gully cutting, the criteria for judging sensitive areas of slope instability, and the criteria for judging risk areas of access road blockage. Indicates the first The set of extreme weather conditions corresponding to each tower location includes at least the threshold for excessive wind speed, the threshold for heavy rainfall, the criteria for determining continuous rainfall, the threshold for ice thickness, the threshold for low visibility, and the threshold for the thickness of slippery surface conditions.

[0022] S22. Based on terrain and environmental data and equipment resource data, determine the optional construction methods for each construction process under the current tower location conditions, and form a set of feasible methods for each process; For the material transportation process, based on the width of the access road, the slope of the temporary road, the accessibility of existing roads, and the equipment passage width requirements in the construction data, the feasibility of various transportation methods, such as all-truck transportation, truck transportation after constructing temporary roads, cableway transportation, or manual transportation, is determined under the current terrain conditions. Transportation methods that meet the passage conditions and equipment capacity requirements are included in the set of feasible methods for the material transportation process. For the site layout process, based on the available area of ​​the surrounding site, site slope, proximity to cliffs or water, and equipment operating space requirements in the construction data, the feasibility of layout methods, such as directly utilizing the existing site, using the site after partial leveling, or creating a new construction site, is determined. Layout methods that meet the site area and equipment turning space requirements are included in the set of feasible methods for the site layout process. For the foundation construction process, based on the foundation type, geological conditions, site space, and equipment capacity parameters in the construction data, the feasibility of construction methods, such as fully mechanized excavation, semi-mechanized excavation, or manual excavation, is determined. Construction methods that meet the equipment operating radius and site bearing capacity requirements are included in the set of feasible methods for the foundation construction process. For the tower erection process, based on the tower type, tower height, tower weight, site space, and rated lifting capacity of the equipment in the construction data, determine the feasibility of construction methods such as overall hoisting, disassembly hoisting, or pole erection. Include erection methods that meet the requirements for hoisting height, lifting capacity, and working radius into the set of feasible methods for the tower erection process. Summarize the sets of feasible methods for each of the above processes to form the total set of feasible construction methods for the current tower location. in: Indicates the first A feasible combination of methods covering all construction procedures.

[0023] S23. Arrange and combine the feasible methods of each process to form multiple combination schemes that include all construction processes. Each combination scheme is an initial construction scheme.

[0024] From the sets of feasible methods for material transportation, site layout, foundation construction, and tower erection, one construction method is selected from each set to form a complete construction method combination. All possible combinations of construction methods are generated by iterating through all the available methods in each set of feasible methods. Each combination includes a material transportation method, a site layout method, a foundation construction method, and a tower erection method, constituting an initial construction plan. All initial construction plans constitute the initial construction plan set.

[0025] S3. Perform strong constraint verification on each initial construction plan, and form candidate construction plans from the plans that pass all verifications; strong constraints include equipment capacity boundary restrictions, restricted access areas, and extreme terrain and meteorological parameter threshold restrictions; In this embodiment, the equipment capability boundary restrictions, prohibited area restrictions, and extreme terrain and meteorological parameter threshold restrictions in the strong constraint verification correspond to the following verification contents: 1. Equipment capacity boundary limitations include: the width of the construction road is not less than the minimum passage width of the equipment; the slope of the construction site is not greater than the equipment's climbing capacity threshold; the area of ​​the construction site meets the requirements for equipment layout and safe rotation; and the hoisting or tower erection operation radius does not exceed the equipment's rated operating radius; an initial construction plan should be established. The determination formulas for the above constraints are as follows: Road width constraints: (Set) For the plan Minimum traffic width along the planned construction road route. If the minimum passage width threshold required by the proposed equipment is given, then: Slope constraint: Set For the plan The maximum slope of the area where the construction site or access road is located. If the ramp-up capability threshold of the proposed equipment is given, then: Site area constraints: For the plan The available area of ​​the construction site. To determine the minimum area required for equipment layout and safe rotation, we have: Operating radius constraint: Set For the plan The maximum operating radius required for hoisting or tower erection operations. Given the rated operating radius of the equipment to be used, then: 2. Restrictions on prohibited areas include: the construction route must not cross ecological protection restricted areas, the construction route must not cross major geological disaster restricted areas, and the scope of construction disturbance must not exceed the prescribed construction disturbance boundaries; set up For the plan The spatial range of the construction path, The area is designated as a no-entry zone for ecological protection. The spatial scope of the restricted area for major geological disasters. For the plan The scope of construction disturbance. If the defined construction disturbance boundary is defined, then: 3. Threshold limits for extreme terrain and meteorological parameters include: for indicators where an increase in value leads to an increase in risk, extreme terrain indicators shall not exceed preset terrain thresholds, and extreme meteorological indicators shall not exceed preset meteorological thresholds; for indicators where a decrease in value leads to an increase in risk, extreme terrain indicators shall not be lower than preset terrain thresholds, and extreme meteorological indicators shall not be lower than preset meteorological thresholds; among them, indicators where an increase in value leads to an increase in risk include slope, elevation difference, site narrowness, wind speed, rainfall intensity, and icing thickness; indicators where a decrease in value leads to an increase in risk include slope stability parameters and visibility parameters.

[0026] set up This represents the actual slope of the current tower location. This represents the actual elevation difference. Due to the narrowness of the venue, This refers to the slope stability coefficient. , , , These are the corresponding preset terrain thresholds; let... The current wind speed, Rainfall intensity, For ice thickness, Visibility; , , , Given the corresponding preset meteorological thresholds, we have: In this embodiment, the schemes that pass all verifications will be considered as candidate construction schemes. The specific determination method is as follows: 1. When an initial construction plan simultaneously meets all the constraints of equipment capacity boundary limits, restricted access areas, and extreme terrain and meteorological parameter threshold limits, the initial construction plan is identified as a candidate construction plan and included in the candidate construction plan set. 2. If an initial construction plan does not meet any constraint condition in any type of constraint, then the initial construction plan shall be removed.

[0027] Let the first The strong constraint decision function is: Candidate solutions only proceed to the comprehensive evaluation stage when all strong constraints are satisfied. in, To impose a strong constraint on the quantity, this embodiment .

[0028] when At that time, the initial construction plan If any of the above is identified as a candidate construction scheme, it will be included in the candidate construction scheme set; when any If the product is 0, the initial construction plan is directly excluded and will not proceed to the subsequent feasibility index calculation and plan comparison stages.

[0029] S4. Construct a multi-attribute evaluation index system, score each scheme in the candidate construction scheme set and calculate the feasibility index, and determine the recommended construction scheme based on the feasibility index; In this embodiment, the multi-attribute evaluation index system includes technical feasibility indicators, implementation timeliness indicators, resource input indicators, and environmental safety indicators; wherein: (1) Technical feasibility indicators include slope adaptability, elevation difference adaptability, road accessibility, site adaptability, equipment capacity satisfaction and process matching; (2) Implementation timeliness indicators include the expected construction period, complexity of process switching, transportation efficiency, and construction continuity; (3) Resource input indicators include road engineering volume, earthwork volume, equipment input cost, cableway construction cost, labor cost and other supporting costs; among them, other supporting costs refer to other expenses directly related to the implementation of the construction plan, other than equipment input cost, cableway construction cost and labor cost, including at least construction management fee, temporary facility fee, seedling compensation fee and transportation coordination fee, which do not overlap with the aforementioned expenses.

[0030] (4) Environmental safety indicators include disturbance area, forest impact, slope disturbance degree, weather sensitivity, construction safety risk and environmental protection compliance.

[0031] Please see Figure 3 Each candidate construction plan is scored and its feasibility index is calculated. Based on the feasibility index, a recommended construction plan is determined, including the following: S41. For each candidate construction scheme in the set, calculate the values ​​of each scheme under the technical feasibility index, implementation timeliness index, resource input index and environmental safety index, and standardize each attribute value to obtain standardized attribute values. Specifically, the first The set of candidate construction schemes for each tower site The Middle One candidate solution The original values ​​for each evaluation attribute are represented as an attribute vector: in: Indicates the first The first tower position The candidate solution is in the... The original values ​​of each evaluation attribute This represents the total number of evaluation attributes. The original values ​​for each evaluation attribute are based on the construction dataset. The relevant data were calculated.

[0032] Because the dimensions and orders of magnitude of each evaluation attribute are different, the attribute values ​​need to be standardized to eliminate the influence of dimensions. Let the first attribute be... The maximum value of each evaluation attribute among all candidate solutions is: The minimum value is .

[0033] For indicators where higher values ​​are considered better, including technical feasibility indicators such as slope adaptability, elevation difference adaptability, road accessibility, site adaptability, equipment capacity adequacy, and process matching; implementation timeliness indicators such as transportation efficiency and construction continuity; and environmental safety indicators such as environmental protection compliance, the following criteria are adopted: For indicators where smaller values ​​are preferred, including the estimated construction period and process changeover complexity in implementation timeliness indicators, the road engineering volume, earthwork volume, equipment investment costs, cableway erection costs, labor costs, and comprehensive costs in resource input indicators, and the disturbance area, forest impact, slope disturbance degree, weather sensitivity, and construction safety risks in environmental safety indicators, the following approach is adopted: in: This is the standardized attribute value. When... hour, ;when hour, Through the above standardization process, attribute values ​​of different dimensions are mapped to the [0,1] interval, and all indicators have a consistent direction that the larger the value, the better the performance, providing a unified basis for subsequent weighted summation.

[0034] S42. Based on the preset index weights, the standardized attribute values ​​are weighted and summed to obtain the comprehensive feasibility index of each candidate construction scheme; The weighting process incorporates industry standards, expert experience and knowledge, and historical engineering case data. Let the weighting factor be... The weights of each evaluation attribute are: Then the weights of all attributes satisfy: The determination of weights is based on: the clear provisions of industry construction regulations on safety, equipment capacity and environmental protection requirements; the expert's understanding and judgment of the adaptability of mechanized construction under different terrain conditions; and the statistics of success rate, resource consumption and risk performance of different construction methods in historical engineering cases.

[0035] For evaluation attributes related to extreme terrain and extreme weather, such as slope adaptability, elevation difference adaptability, weather sensitivity, slope disturbance degree and construction safety risk, their weights can be appropriately increased according to the degree of influence of extreme conditions in specific engineering scenarios, so as to enhance the sensitivity and discrimination of the evaluation system to complex conditions.

[0036] The standardized attribute values ​​are weighted and summed to obtain the first... The first tower position The feasibility index of each candidate solution.

[0037] S43. When calculating the feasibility index, for candidate schemes that have the impact of extreme terrain or extreme weather, an extreme condition penalty term is introduced to correct the feasibility index, resulting in a corrected feasibility index. First, construct sub-evaluation functions according to indicator categories. Let... , , , Let each represent a set of attributes belonging to the technical feasibility indicator, implementation timeliness indicator, resource input indicator, and environmental safety indicator, then: Technical feasibility score: Implementation timeliness score: Resource input score: Environmental safety score: Furthermore, define the first The first tower position The feasibility index of each candidate solution is the weighted sum of the scores from the four categories mentioned above: in: , , , The weighted coefficients for the categories of technical feasibility, implementation timeliness, resource input, and environmental safety are respectively used to meet the following requirements. Feasibility Index The larger the value, the better the overall performance of the candidate construction plan after comprehensively considering various factors.

[0038] For candidate solutions that have the impact of extreme terrain or extreme weather but have not yet triggered the strong constraint elimination in step S3, this embodiment further introduces an extreme condition penalty term for correction. The corrected feasibility index is: in: The extreme terrain risk item is determined by comprehensively considering the risks of excessive slope, sudden elevation changes, narrow site conditions, slope stability, and access road closures. Extreme weather risk items are determined by a combination of risks including wind speed exceeding limits, rain-induced slippage, icing, and low visibility. and These are the extreme terrain penalty adjustment coefficient and the extreme weather penalty adjustment coefficient, respectively, with a value range of (0,1]. They can be set according to the sensitivity of the actual project to extreme conditions.

[0039] S44. The candidate construction scheme with the highest revised feasibility index is determined as the recommended construction scheme.

[0040] Specifically, in the candidate construction scheme set In the middle, the revised feasibility index of each candidate scheme Sort the candidates in descending order and select the one with the highest feasibility index after correction as the recommended construction plan for the current tower location. : This recommended construction plan is the optimal plan determined after comprehensive evaluation of multiple attributes, taking into account the current terrain conditions, equipment resources, standard constraints, and real-time status. This plan achieves a comprehensive and optimal balance in terms of technical feasibility, implementation timeliness, resource input, and environmental safety, providing a benchmark plan for subsequent construction implementation and risk monitoring.

[0041] S5. Collect real-time risk parameters and calculate risk probabilities, and calculate the scheme deviation index by combining construction progress and working condition deviation data; Recommended construction plan Once determined and implemented, the construction environment and status will dynamically change over time. To promptly identify the risks of reduced feasibility due to extreme terrain conditions, extreme weather conditions, and deviations in construction execution, this embodiment constructs a real-time risk assessment model and a scheme deviation assessment model. Please refer to [link / reference]. Figure 4 Including the following: S51. Collect the real-time risk status parameters at the current moment, and convert each real-time risk status parameter into a standardized risk value through a risk mapping function; Through monitoring equipment and sensor networks deployed at the construction site, data is collected in real time. Each tower location at time Risk state parameter set : in: This refers to the number of risk status parameters. Risk status parameters include at least: real-time wind speed, rainfall intensity, slope stability, road accessibility, equipment attitude, equipment load, site congestion, degree of operational conflict, and construction schedule deviation. These parameters are dynamically acquired from real-time status data in the construction dataset through corresponding data interfaces. Among these, slope stability, road accessibility, and equipment attitude can be comprehensively determined based on on-site sensor data and image analysis results.

[0042] Since the parameters of each risk state have different dimensions, they need to be converted into standardized risk values ​​that can be calculated uniformly. Let the first... Risk status parameters The corresponding risk mapping function is This function maps the original parameter values ​​to the [0,1] interval, with larger values ​​indicating higher risk. The standardized risk value is then calculated. for: Here, the risk mapping function is pre-set based on the physical characteristics of the parameters and engineering safety standards.

[0043] S52. Calculate the real-time risk score, which is represented by the weighted sum of each standardized risk value, and introduces an extreme terrain risk increment and an extreme weather risk increment on the basis of the weighted sum. Let the weights of each risk state parameter be... ,satisfy: The weights reflect the degree of influence of each risk parameter on the feasibility of the construction plan, and can be determined based on historical accident statistics and expert experience. Each tower location at time Basic real-time risk score for: To reflect the dynamic impact of extreme terrain and weather conditions during construction, an incremental item for extreme terrain risk is introduced into the basic risk score. and the increase in extreme weather risk items The corrected real-time risk score is obtained. : Incremental items of extreme terrain risk This method is used to quantify the additional risks arising from deteriorating terrain conditions in the current construction area. The determination method involves real-time monitoring of key terrain parameters in the construction area, including slope, elevation difference, site narrowness, slope stability, and access road accessibility. When any terrain parameter deteriorates beyond the permissible range for safe construction, the corresponding individual risk increment is calculated based on the actual degree of deterioration. For example, a steeper slope results in a greater slope risk increment, lower slope stability results in a greater slope risk increment, and any interruption of the access road directly contributes to the corresponding access risk increment. The individual risk increments are weighted and summed according to their impact on construction safety to obtain the extreme terrain risk increment at the current moment. If all terrain parameters are within the permissible range for safe construction, this increment is zero.

[0044] Incremental items of extreme weather risk This method is used to quantify the additional risks arising from sudden or deteriorating weather conditions at any given moment. The determination method involves real-time collection of meteorological parameters in the construction area, including wind speed, rainfall intensity, icing thickness, and visibility. When any meteorological parameter deteriorates to a level exceeding the permissible conditions for safe construction operations, the corresponding individual risk increment is calculated based on the actual degree of deterioration. For example, higher wind speeds result in a greater wind-induced risk increment, and lower visibility results in a greater visual impairment risk increment. The individual risk increments are then weighted and summed according to their impact on construction safety to obtain the current extreme weather risk increment. If all meteorological parameters are within the permissible range for safe construction operations, this increment is zero.

[0045] In the above formula: , These are adjustment coefficients for the risk increments of extreme terrain and extreme weather, respectively, used to control the contribution of the increment to the total risk; Indicates in The moment that occurred The residual risk value of an abnormal event The attenuation coefficient is... This is the adjustment coefficient.

[0046] S53. Map real-time risk scores to risk probabilities; To transform risk scores into intuitive risk probability values, a sigmoid function is used for mapping, yielding the... Each tower location at time Risk probability : Among them: since the standardized risk value, extreme risk increment term, and historical anomaly residual value are all non-negative, the real-time risk score... Therefore, the probability of risk ,when When smaller A value close to 0.5 indicates that the construction plan is in a low-risk state; when When it increases, A value close to 1 indicates that the construction plan is in a high-risk state.

[0047] S54. Construct a deviation vector of the current construction status relative to the recommended construction plan. The deviation vector includes path deviation, schedule deviation, cost deviation, equipment condition deviation, and environmental disturbance deviation. During the implementation of the construction plan, due to factors such as changes in site conditions, adjustments in resource allocation, and deviations in construction organization, the actual construction status may deviate from the planned parameters of the recommended construction plan. To quantify the degree of this deviation, a deviation vector is constructed. For the first The current construction plan being implemented at each tower site, at any given time... The deviation vector is: in: To determine the number of deviation terms, the deviation vector must include at least the following five deviation terms: Path deviation: The actual access road, access path or cableway path used during construction is spatially compared with the path planned in the recommended construction plan. The path offset distance or the degree of path change is calculated and used as the path deviation value.

[0048] Schedule Deviation Item: The current actual construction progress is compared with the planned schedule in the recommended construction plan, and the proportion of time that has been delayed or advanced is calculated as the schedule deviation value.

[0049] Cost Deviation Item: The actual costs incurred are compared with the budgeted costs in the recommended construction plan, and the proportion of cost overrun or cost saving is calculated as the cost deviation value.

[0050] Equipment operating condition deviation: The actual types, quantities, and operating conditions of the machinery and equipment put into use are compared with the equipment configuration plan in the recommended construction scheme. The deviation of equipment capacity utilization or the degree of equipment change is calculated and used as the equipment operating condition deviation value.

[0051] Environmental disturbance deviation: The actual construction disturbance area, logging volume, slope excavation volume, and other environmental disturbance indicators are compared with the estimated environmental impact range in the recommended construction plan. The excess ratio of environmental disturbance is calculated and used as the environmental disturbance deviation value.

[0052] S55. Standardize each deviation item, and perform a weighted sum of squares and square root operation on each standardized deviation item to obtain the scheme deviation index; among them, the path deviation item, schedule deviation item, cost deviation item, equipment condition deviation item, and environmental disturbance deviation item are calculated by comparing the parameters of the corresponding plan in the recommended construction scheme with the parameters of the current actual construction status.

[0053] The dimensions and value ranges of the aforementioned deviation items are inconsistent. The path deviation item has the dimension of length, while the schedule deviation, cost deviation, and environmental disturbance deviation items have proportional values, and the equipment condition deviation item has the value of the degree of deviation. Directly performing comprehensive calculations will cause the results to be affected by the dimensions. Therefore, after constructing the deviation vector, each deviation item needs to be standardized.

[0054] Define the scheme deviation index The square root of the weighted sum of squares of each deviation term after standardization: in: For the first The weighting coefficient of each deviation term reflects the importance of that deviation to the overall feasibility of the plan. Furthermore, it can be set according to actual management needs. Scheme Deviation Index This comprehensively reflects the overall deviation of the current construction status from the original recommended construction plan. When the deviation index is small, it indicates that the actual construction is progressing in an orderly manner according to plan, and the feasibility of the plan remains good. When the deviation index is large, even if no direct safety risks have yet occurred, it indicates that the original plan has seriously deviated from expectations in terms of timeliness, economy, or implementation, and a reassessment of the plan is required.

[0055] S6. Based on the risk probability and the scheme deviation index, a joint early warning judgment is made. If the early warning is triggered, an alternative construction scheme is output. If the early warning is not triggered, the recommended construction scheme is maintained.

[0056] Please see Figure 5 This part is implemented through the following sub-steps: S61. Set risk probability warning threshold and deviation index warning threshold; Based on the safety regulations for transmission line construction, historical construction risk statistics, and project management experience, risk probability early warning thresholds are pre-set. Sum Deviation Index Warning Threshold Risk probability warning threshold The threshold value used to determine whether the current construction plan is in a high-risk state due to environmental and condition deterioration, with a value range of [value missing]. Deviation Index Warning Threshold The threshold value used to determine whether the deviation between the actual construction status and the recommended construction plan has significantly affected the feasibility of the plan can be determined by comprehensively considering factors such as the maximum allowable deviation ratio of the project schedule and the cost overrun ratio.

[0057] S62. When the risk probability reaches or exceeds the risk probability warning threshold, or the scheme deviation index reaches or exceeds the deviation index warning threshold, it is determined that the feasibility risk warning of the construction scheme is triggered. At each monitoring moment Obtain the current risk probability calculated in step S5. Deviation index of the plan And compare them with preset thresholds respectively. The condition for triggering an alert is: if This indicates that the current construction environment risk has significantly increased, potentially endangering construction safety or causing construction interruption; or, if This indicates that the current construction execution status has deviated significantly from the original recommended construction plan, and the original plan's schedule, cost, or process indicators can no longer be effectively achieved.

[0058] Meeting either of the above two conditions triggers a feasibility risk warning for the construction plan. Simultaneously, to further guide subsequent adjustments, the dominant factor triggering the warning can be recorded: if triggered solely by an excessive risk probability, it is primarily attributed to real-time changes in extreme weather or terrain conditions; if triggered solely by an excessive deviation index, it is primarily attributed to cumulative deviations during construction execution; if both exceed limits simultaneously, it indicates that environmental degradation and execution deviations jointly render the original plan infeasible. This risk triggering cause will serve as reference information when outputting alternative solutions.

[0059] S63. After the early warning is triggered, for each candidate construction scheme, a risk penalty term and a deviation exceeding the limit penalty term are introduced on the basis of the modified feasibility index, the modified evaluation function is calculated, a comprehensive evaluation is carried out again and the schemes are ranked, and the candidate construction scheme with the best ranking is output as the alternative construction scheme. Once an early warning is triggered, the candidate construction scheme set is first evaluated based on the current real-time terrain conditions, weather conditions, and equipment status. Each scheme in the set undergoes a re-verification of the strong constraints in step S3. If a candidate scheme no longer satisfies any constraint condition of any type of strong constraint under the current conditions, it is removed from the candidate scheme set and will no longer participate in subsequent evaluations. The schemes that have passed the re-verification constitute the updated candidate scheme set, and the schemes in this set are then subject to subsequent penalty corrections and re-ranking. The corrected feasibility index of each candidate scheme calculated in step S4 is then used as the basis for further evaluation. Based on this, a new modified evaluation function is constructed by further introducing risk penalty terms and deviation over-limit penalty terms. Among them, different candidate construction schemes have different sensitivities to the same risk state and deviation state due to different construction methods, and therefore the penalty terms introduced are also different: in: This is an indicator function that takes the value 1 when the condition inside the parentheses is true, and 0 otherwise; For high-risk penalties, The deviation penalty coefficient is a positive number. It is used to appropriately deduct the feasibility index of candidate solutions when risks or deviations exceed the limit. This causes the scores of solutions that are still based on similar construction conditions under the current extreme environment or cumulative deviations to decrease, thus tending to select alternative solutions that are more adaptable to environmental changes or have a higher tolerance for deviations.

[0060] Recalculate each candidate solution Then, the candidate schemes are sorted from largest to smallest according to this value, and the candidate scheme with the best ranking is selected as the alternative construction scheme. : The output of alternative construction solutions should include at least: the specific combination of construction methods for the alternative solutions, the estimated construction period, the estimated cost, and a description of the changes in risks compared to the current solution, as well as a clear distinction between the causes of the risks—whether they are due to extreme terrain factors, extreme weather factors, or a combination of both, or due to the cumulative effect of solution deviations. This output can directly guide timely adjustments to the construction deployment on site, such as changing transportation methods, adjusting the route of construction access roads, adding cableway transportation, changing from fully mechanized to semi-mechanized operations, adjusting the construction time window to avoid periods of severe weather, or making corresponding changes to the site layout.

[0061] S64. If the risk probability does not reach the risk probability warning threshold and the scheme deviation index does not reach the deviation index warning threshold, then the current recommended construction scheme shall remain unchanged.

[0062] when This indicates that the current construction risks are within an acceptable range, and the actual construction status is basically consistent with the original recommended plan. The feasibility of the plan has not been substantially affected, so the original recommended construction plan should continue to be implemented. No adjustments will be made. This judgment complements the triggering warning, ensuring that the plan is switched only when necessary, avoiding frequent changes that would incur additional construction organization costs.

[0063] An embodiment of the feasibility assessment and risk warning device for construction schemes in complex terrain according to the present invention includes the following: The dataset construction module is used to obtain the digital model of the construction plan corresponding to the tower location to be analyzed, and to integrate multi-source data to construct the construction dataset; Several initial construction scheme generation modules are used to combine the optional construction methods of each construction process and generate several initial construction schemes based on the construction dataset and under the construction organization framework represented by the digital model of the construction scheme. The candidate construction scheme determination module is used to perform strong constraint verification on each initial construction scheme, and the schemes that pass all verifications are used to form candidate construction schemes. Strong constraints include equipment capacity boundary restrictions, restricted access areas, and extreme terrain and meteorological parameter threshold restrictions. The recommended construction scheme determination module is used to construct a multi-attribute evaluation index system, score each scheme in the candidate construction scheme set and calculate the feasibility index, and determine the recommended construction scheme based on the feasibility index. The risk probability and scheme deviation index calculation module is used to collect real-time risk parameters and calculate risk probabilities, and at the same time calculate the scheme deviation index by combining construction progress and working condition deviation data. The early warning determination module is used to make joint early warning determinations based on risk probability and scheme deviation index. If an early warning is triggered, an alternative construction scheme is output; otherwise, the recommended construction scheme is maintained.

[0064] For specific limitations regarding the device, please refer to the limitations of the method above, which will not be repeated here. Each module in the above device can be implemented entirely or partially through software, hardware, or a combination thereof. These modules can be embedded in or independent of the processor in a computer device in hardware form, or stored in the memory of a computer device in software form, so that the processor can call and execute the operations corresponding to each module.

[0065] It is understood that those skilled in the art can combine various implementation methods in the above embodiments under the guidance of the above examples to obtain technical solutions with multiple implementation methods.

[0066] The above description is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the present invention. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, and improvements made within the spirit and principles of the present invention should be included within the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for feasibility assessment and risk warning of construction schemes in complex terrain, characterized in that, include: Obtain the digital model of the construction plan corresponding to the tower location to be analyzed, and integrate multi-source data to construct a construction dataset; Based on the construction dataset, under the construction organization framework represented by the digital model of the construction scheme, the optional construction methods for each construction process are combined to generate several initial construction schemes. Each initial construction plan is subjected to strong constraint verification, and the plans that pass all verifications are used to form candidate construction plans; the strong constraints include equipment capacity boundary restrictions, restricted access areas, and extreme terrain and meteorological parameter threshold restrictions; A multi-attribute evaluation index system is constructed to score each scheme in the candidate construction scheme set and calculate the feasibility index. Based on the feasibility index, the recommended construction scheme is determined. Collect real-time risk parameters and calculate risk probabilities, and combine construction progress and working condition deviation data to calculate the scheme deviation index; A joint early warning judgment is made based on the risk probability and the scheme deviation index. If an early warning is triggered, an alternative construction scheme is output; otherwise, the recommended construction scheme is maintained.

2. The method for feasibility assessment and risk warning of construction schemes in complex terrain according to claim 1, characterized in that, Based on the construction dataset, and within the construction organization framework represented by the digital model of the construction scheme, the optional construction methods for each construction procedure are combined to generate several initial construction schemes, including: Extract the terrain environment data and equipment resource data of the current tower location from the construction dataset; Based on the terrain and equipment resource data, the optional construction methods for each construction process under the current tower location conditions are determined, forming a set of feasible methods for each process. The feasible methods for each process are arranged and combined to form multiple combination schemes that include all construction processes. Each combination scheme is an initial construction scheme.

3. The method for feasibility assessment and risk warning of construction schemes in complex terrain according to claim 1, characterized in that, The equipment capability boundary restrictions, prohibited area restrictions, and extreme terrain and meteorological parameter threshold restrictions in the strong constraint verification correspond to the following verification contents: The equipment capacity boundary limits include: the width of the construction road is not less than the minimum passage width of the equipment, the slope of the construction site is not greater than the climbing capacity threshold of the equipment, the area of ​​the construction site meets the requirements for equipment layout and safe rotation, and the hoisting or tower erection operation radius does not exceed the rated operating radius of the equipment. The restrictions on prohibited areas include: the construction route must not cross ecological protection restricted areas, the construction route must not cross major geological disaster restricted areas, and the scope of construction disturbance must not exceed the prescribed construction disturbance boundaries; The threshold limits for extreme terrain and meteorological parameters include: for indicators where an increase in value leads to an increase in risk, the extreme terrain indicator shall not exceed a preset terrain threshold, and the extreme meteorological indicator shall not exceed a preset meteorological threshold; for indicators where a decrease in value leads to an increase in risk, the extreme terrain indicator shall not be lower than a preset terrain threshold, and the extreme meteorological indicator shall not be lower than a preset meteorological threshold; wherein, the indicators where an increase in value leads to an increase in risk include slope, elevation difference, site narrowness, wind speed, rainfall intensity, and icing thickness; the indicators where a decrease in value leads to an increase in risk include slope stability parameters and visibility parameters.

4. The method for feasibility assessment and risk warning of construction schemes in complex terrain according to claim 3, characterized in that, The schemes that pass all verifications will be considered as candidate construction schemes, including: When an initial construction plan simultaneously meets all the constraints of the equipment capacity boundary limit, the restricted area limit, and the extreme terrain and meteorological parameter threshold limit, the initial construction plan is determined as a candidate construction plan and included in the candidate construction plan set. If an initial construction plan does not meet any of the constraints in any type of constraint, then the initial construction plan is excluded.

5. The method for feasibility assessment and risk warning of a construction scheme in complex terrain according to claim 1, characterized in that, The multi-attribute evaluation index system includes technical feasibility indicators, implementation timeliness indicators, resource input indicators, and environmental safety indicators; among which: The technical feasibility indicators include slope adaptability, elevation difference adaptability, road accessibility, site adaptability, equipment capacity satisfaction, and process matching. The implementation timeliness indicators include the expected construction period, the complexity of process switching, transportation efficiency, and construction continuity; The resource input indicators include road engineering volume, earthwork volume, equipment input cost, cableway construction cost, labor cost and other supporting costs; The environmental safety indicators include the area of ​​disturbance, the amount of forest impact, the degree of slope disturbance, weather sensitivity, construction safety risks, and environmental protection compliance.

6. The method for feasibility assessment and risk warning of a construction scheme in complex terrain according to claim 5, characterized in that, The process of scoring each candidate construction plan in the set and calculating a feasibility index, and then determining the recommended construction plan based on the feasibility index, includes: For each candidate construction scheme, calculate the values ​​of each scheme under the technical feasibility index, implementation timeliness index, resource input index and environmental safety index, and standardize each attribute value to obtain standardized attribute values. Based on the preset index weights, the standardized attribute values ​​are weighted and summed to obtain the feasibility index of each candidate construction scheme. When calculating the feasibility index, for candidate solutions that have the impact of extreme terrain or extreme weather, an extreme condition penalty term is introduced to modify the feasibility index, resulting in a modified feasibility index. The candidate construction scheme with the highest revised feasibility index is selected as the recommended construction scheme.

7. The method for feasibility assessment and risk warning of a construction scheme in complex terrain according to claim 1, characterized in that, The process of collecting real-time risk parameters and calculating risk probabilities includes: Collect real-time risk status parameters at the current moment, and convert each real-time risk status parameter into a standardized risk value through a risk mapping function; Calculate the real-time risk score, which is represented by the weighted sum of each standardized risk value, and introduce an extreme terrain risk increment and an extreme weather risk increment on the basis of the weighted sum; The real-time risk score is mapped to a risk probability.

8. The method for feasibility assessment and risk warning of a construction scheme in complex terrain according to claim 7, characterized in that, The calculation of the scheme deviation index by combining construction progress and working condition deviation data includes: Construct a deviation vector of the current construction status relative to the recommended construction plan. The deviation vector includes path deviation, schedule deviation, cost deviation, equipment condition deviation, and environmental disturbance deviation. Each deviation term is standardized, and the weighted sum of squares and square root of the standardized deviation terms are then calculated to obtain the scheme deviation index. The path deviation, schedule deviation, cost deviation, equipment condition deviation, and environmental disturbance deviation are calculated by comparing the current actual construction status with the parameters of the corresponding plan in the recommended construction scheme.

9. The method for feasibility assessment and risk warning of a construction scheme in complex terrain according to claim 1, characterized in that, The joint early warning determination based on the risk probability and the scheme deviation index, if triggered, outputs an alternative construction scheme; if not triggered, the recommended construction scheme is maintained, including: Set risk probability warning thresholds and deviation index warning thresholds; When the risk probability reaches or exceeds the risk probability warning threshold, or the scheme deviation index reaches or exceeds the deviation index warning threshold, it is determined that a construction scheme feasibility risk warning is triggered. After the warning is triggered, for each of the candidate construction schemes in the set, a risk penalty term and a deviation exceeding the limit penalty term are introduced on the basis of the modified feasibility index, the modified evaluation function is calculated, a comprehensive evaluation is carried out again and the schemes are sorted, and the candidate construction scheme with the best ranking is output as the alternative construction scheme. If the risk probability does not reach the risk probability warning threshold and the scheme deviation index does not reach the deviation index warning threshold, then the current recommended construction scheme will remain unchanged.

10. A device for feasibility assessment and risk warning of construction schemes in complex terrain, characterized in that, The method for feasibility assessment and risk warning of construction schemes in complex terrain as described in any one of claims 1 to 9 includes: The dataset construction module is used to obtain the digital model of the construction plan corresponding to the tower location to be analyzed, and to integrate multi-source data to construct the construction dataset; Several initial construction scheme generation modules are used to combine the optional construction methods of each construction process based on the construction dataset and under the construction organization framework represented by the digital model of the construction scheme, to generate several initial construction schemes. The candidate construction scheme determination module is used to perform strong constraint verification on each initial construction scheme, and the schemes that pass all verifications are used to form candidate construction schemes; the strong constraints include equipment capacity boundary restrictions, restricted access areas, and extreme terrain and meteorological parameter threshold restrictions. The recommended construction scheme determination module is used to construct a multi-attribute evaluation index system, score each scheme in the candidate construction scheme set and calculate the feasibility index, and determine the recommended construction scheme based on the feasibility index. The risk probability and scheme deviation index calculation module is used to collect real-time risk parameters and calculate risk probabilities, and at the same time calculate the scheme deviation index by combining construction progress and working condition deviation data. The early warning determination module is used to make a joint early warning determination based on the risk probability and the scheme deviation index. If an early warning is triggered, an alternative construction scheme is output; otherwise, the recommended construction scheme is maintained.

Images