4.6 Article

Risk assessment model of tunnel water inrush based on improved attribute mathematical theory

Journal

JOURNAL OF CENTRAL SOUTH UNIVERSITY
Volume 25, Issue 2, Pages 379-391

Publisher

JOURNAL OF CENTRAL SOUTH UNIV TECHNOLOGY
DOI: 10.1007/s11771-018-3744-5

Keywords

tunnel water inrush; risk assessment model; attribute mathematical theory; nonlinear measurement function; similar weight method

Funding

  1. National Basic Research Program (973) of China [2013CB036004]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51378510]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Tunnel water inrush is one of the common geological disasters in the underground engineering construction. In order to effectively evaluate and control the occurrence of water inrush, the risk assessment model of tunnel water inrush was proposed based on improved attribute mathematical theory. The trigonometric functions were adopted to optimize the attribute mathematical theory, avoiding the influence of mutation points and linear variation zones in traditional linear measurement functions on the accuracy of the model. Based on comprehensive analysis of various factors, five parameters were selected as the evaluation indicators for the model, including tunnel head pressure, permeability coefficient of surrounding rock, crushing degree of surrounding rock, relative angle of joint plane and tunnel section size, under the principle of dimension rationality, independence, directness and quantification. The indicator classifications were determined. The links among measured data were analyzed in detail, and the objective weight of each indicator was determined by using similar weight method. Thereby the tunnel water inrush risk assessment model is established and applied in four target segments of two different tunnels in engineering. The evaluation results and the actual excavation data agree well, which indicates that the model is of high credibility and feasibility.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available