Risk Assessment Method of Deep Foundation Pit Construction Based on Two-Dimensional Cloud Model

doi:10.12068/j.issn.1005-3026.2024.10.017

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to take into account the fuzzy and random uncertainty involved in risk assessment of deep foundation pit construction， a risk assessment method for deep foundation pit construction based on two?dimensional cloud model and 3E_n rule is proposed. Firstly， the risk sources of deep foundation pit construction are identified， and the construction risk assessment index system composed of risk factors is established. Secondly， based on the engineering situation， the Delphi method is used to preliminary determine. Furthermore， the subjective and objective weights of the assessment indexes are determined by the analytic hierarchy process and entropy weight method， and the comprehensive weights are obtained. Then， the two?dimensional standard cloud and synthesized cloud are generated according to the risk assessment criteria and the forward cloud generator. Finally， the 3E_n rule of the cloud model and the distribution probability of synthesized cloud droplets are used to judge the risk level membership. The proposed risk assessment method is applied to predict the construction risk level of a deep foundation pit project in Nanning city. Compared with the traditional fuzzy comprehensive risk assessment method， the reliability of the assessment method is verified.

Key words: foundation pit engineering, risk assessment, cloud model, uncertainty analysis, index system

CLC Number:

TU 43

Zhen HUANG, Chen CAO, Wei ZHANG, Shao-kun MA. Risk Assessment Method of Deep Foundation Pit Construction Based on Two-Dimensional Cloud Model[J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Natural Science), 2024, 45(10): 1504-1512.

Figures/Tables 13

Fig.1 Two?dimensional cloud model obeying standard normal distribution

Fig.2 Risk assessment process of deep foundation pit construction

Fig.3 Risk factors of deep foundation pit construction

Fig.4 Standard cloud of risk assessment criteria

Fig.5 Location and investigation of deep foundation pit

Fig.6 Section of deep foundation pit support（unit:m）

Table 4 Risk assessment index weight of deep foundation pit construction

准则层（一级指标）	主观权重	客观权重	综合权重	子准则层（二级指标）	主观权重	P_K 的客观权重	C的客观权重	P_K 的综合权重	C的综合权重
R1：安全风险	0.430	0.162	0.429	R11：支护结构刚度不足	0.278	0.190	0.182	0.122	0.141
				R12：支护结构强度不足	0.366	0.212	0.190	0.258	0.267
				R13：坑底隆起	0.043	0.182	0.182	0.057	0.065
				R14：地面沉降	0.045	0.234	0.211	0.411	0.386
				R15：结构变形	0.269	0.182	0.234	0.152	0.141
R2：管理风险	0.046	0.196	0.056	R21：施工安全管理不规范	0.147	0.173	0.194	0.122	0.141
				R22：成本控制风险	0.241	0.223	0.224	0.258	0.267
				R23：管理人员管理经验不足	0.068	0.174	0.193	0.057	0.065
				R24：监测不及时	0.398	0.215	0.196	0.411	0.386
				R25：管理体制不健全	0.147	0.215	0.194	0.152	0.141
R3：施工风险	0.145	0.153	0.136	R31：施工设备运行风险	0.059	0.196	0.185	0.057	0.054
				R32：施工方案不合理、技术不足	0.161	0.217	0.193	0.175	0.156
				R33：施工质量差、施工不规范	0.310	0.196	0.193	0.305	0.300
				R34：地下水控制不足	0.310	0.196	0.193	0.305	0.300
				R35：开挖进程过快	0.161	0.196	0.237	0.158	0.191
R4：设计风险	0.201	0.159	0.196	R41：设计理论基础不足	0.101	0.243	0.255	0.099	0.104
				R42：缺乏可供参考的经验	0.134	0.270	0.245	0.147	0.133
				R43：支护结构设计不足	0.236	0.243	0.255	0.232	0.242
				R44：设计未考虑地下水和周围建筑	0.529	0.243	0.244	0.521	0.521
R5：环境风险	0.111	0.177	0.121	R51：不利的地质条件	0.122	0.337	0.334	0.126	0.122
				R52：不可抗力	0.558	0.303	0.333	0.520	0.558
				R53：周围建筑物及设施影响	0.320	0.360	0.333	0.354	0.319
R6：技术风险	0.067	0.152	0.063	R61：勘测失误	0.164	0.257	0.238	0.177	0.147
				R62：监测误警、漏警	0.307	0.232	0.241	0.300	0.279
				R63：开挖前调查不足	0.483	0.231	0.293	0.469	0.534
				R64：技术人员缺乏专业技能	0.046	0.280	0.228	0.054	0.039

Table 5 Preliminary analysis results of six types of risks

特征值		指标
特征值		R1	R2	R3	R4	R5	R6
P_K	E $x 1$	0.706 9	0.698 6	0.718 4	0.810 8	0.752 0	0.678 5
	E $x 1$	0.061 7	0.074 7	0.074 9	0.078 9	0.116 3	0.113 3
	H $1$	0.024 5	0.019 0	0.026 8	0.038 1	0.062 9	0.038 3
C	E $x 2$	0.548 2	0.699 1	0.579 1	0.646 9	0.569 1	0.655 7
	E $n 2$	0.058 9	0.075 8	0.065 9	0.062 1	0.070 9	0.075 5
	H₂	0.030 1	0.018 5	0.021 5	0.028 8	0.028 9	0.040 7
风险等级		Ⅱ级	Ⅰ级	Ⅱ级	Ⅰ级	Ⅱ级	Ⅰ级

Table 5 Preliminary analysis results of six types of risks

特征值		指标
特征值		R1	R2	R3	R4	R5	R6
P_K	E $x 1$	0.706 9	0.698 6	0.718 4	0.810 8	0.752 0	0.678 5
	E $x 1$	0.061 7	0.074 7	0.074 9	0.078 9	0.116 3	0.113 3
	H $1$	0.024 5	0.019 0	0.026 8	0.038 1	0.062 9	0.038 3
C	E $x 2$	0.548 2	0.699 1	0.579 1	0.646 9	0.569 1	0.655 7
	E $n 2$	0.058 9	0.075 8	0.065 9	0.062 1	0.070 9	0.075 5
	H₂	0.030 1	0.018 5	0.021 5	0.028 8	0.028 9	0.040 7
风险等级		Ⅱ级	Ⅰ级	Ⅱ级	Ⅰ级	Ⅱ级	Ⅰ级

Fig.7 Risk assessment results of deep foundation pit construction

Table 6 Number of integrated cloud drops in standard cloud （average value of 50 cycles）

循环次数	N₁(H区域)	N₂(M区域)	N₃(N区域)	N₄(G区域)	N₅(L区域)	N₆(S区域)
1	253	79	42	364	8	15
2	259	75	54	356	8	5
3	286	55	50	333	8	11
4	294	70	46	347	8	11
5	267	68	53	328	8	19
...	...		...	...	...	...
46	267	64	41	380	8	13
47	275	70	62	341	8	11
48	249	87	51	329	8	15
49	277	66	54	356	8	11
50	267	81	44	340	8	15
平均值	269.16	72.60	54.46	336.52	8.00	12.86
概率	0.357	0.096	0.072	0.447	0.011	0.017

References 14

1	Nie S M， Ren F.Study on risk management of deep foundation pit engineering［J］.Applied Mechanics and Materials，2014（638/639/640）：574-579.
2	Zhou H B， Zhang H.Risk assessment methodology for a deep foundation pit construction project in Shanghai，China［J］.Journal of Construction Engineering and Management，2011，137（12）：1185-1194.
3	Eskesen S D， Tengborg P， Kampmann J，et al.Guidelines for tunnelling risk management：international tunnelling association，working group No.2［J］.Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology，2004，19（3）：217-237.
4	杜修力，张雪峰，张明聚，等．基于证据理论的深基坑工程施工风险综合评价［J］．岩土工程学报，2014，36（1）：155-161.
	Du Xiu‑li， Zhang Xue‑feng， Zhang Ming‑ju，et al.Risk synthetic assessment for deep pit construction based on evidence theory［J］.Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering，2014，36（1）：155-161.
5	王乾坤，亢显卫，朱科．地铁深基坑施工风险耦合评价方法［J］．东北大学学报（自然科学版），2021，42（8）：1152-1158.
	Wang Qian‑kun， Kang Xian‑wei， Zhu Ke.Coupling evaluation method of the construction risk for subway deep foundation pit［J］.Journal of Northeastern University（Natural Science），2021，42（8）：1152-1158.
6	胡长明，刘林，王晓华，等．基于模糊熵-云理论的二维深基坑施工风险评价［J］．安全与环境学报，2021，21（2）：521-528.
	Hu Chang‑ming， Liu Lin， Wang Xiao‑hua，et al.Risk assessment for the 2-D deep foundation pit based on the fuzzy entropy‑cloud theory［J］.Journal of Safety and Environment，2021，21（2）：521-528.
7	曹文贵，翟友成，张永杰．悬臂支护基坑失稳风险的改进风险矩阵分析方法［J］．岩土工程学报，2012，34（2）：210-216.
	Cao Wen‑gui， Zhai You‑cheng， Zhang Yong‑jie.Improved risk matrix method of instability risk for excavations with cantilever retaining［J］.Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering，2012，34（2）：210-216.
8	Valipour A， Yahaya N， Md Noor N，et al.Hybrid SWARA-COPRAS method for risk assessment in deep foundation excavation project：an Iranian case study［J］.Journal of Civil Engineering and Management，2017，23（4）：524-532.
9	You W B， Wang J B， Zhang W，et al.Construction risk assessment of deep foundation pit in metro station based on G-COWA method［C］//The 2nd International Workshop on Renewable Energy and Development （IWRED）.Bristol：IOP Publishing，2018，153：052018.
10	Zhang L， Li H B.Construction risk assessment of deep foundation pit projects based on the projection pursuit method and improved set pair analysis［J］.Applied Sciences-Basel，2022，12（4）：1922.
11	Huang Z， Fu H L， Zhang J B，et al.Structural damage evaluation method for metro shield tunnel［J］.Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities，2019，33（1）：04018097.
12	Lyu J， Cheng X F， Shaw P.Terrain hazard risk analysis for flood disaster management in Chaohu basin，China，based on two‑dimensional cloud［J］.Journal of Advanced Computational Intelligence and Intelligent Informatics，2020，24（4）：532-542.
13	中国土木工程学会．地铁及地下工程建设风险管理指南［M］．北京：中国建筑工业出版社，2007.
	China Society of Civil Engineering.Guideline of risk management for construction of subway and underground works［M］.Beijing：China Architecture Publishing，2007.
14	中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部．城市轨道交通地下工程建设风险管理规范：［S］．北京：中国铁道出版社，2011.
	Ministry of Housing and Urban‑Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China. Code for risk management of underground works in urban rail transit：［S］.Beijing：China Railway Publishing，2011.

[1]	ZHU Guo-qing， CHEN Yan， LANG Kun， WANG Shu-tian. Research on Risk Warning of Network Public Opinion for Forest Fires from the Perspective for Information Ecology [J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Natural Science), 2023, 44(8): 1208-1216.
[2]	LIU Jian-po， WU Feng， WANG Ren， ZHANG Jun-jie. Quantitative Risk Assessment for Deep Tunnel Failure Based on Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation [J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Natural Science), 2022, 43(5): 733-739.
[3]	WANG Xin， WANG Jing， LI Jin-feng. Risk Assessment of Social Networking Recruitment Based on Bayesian Network [J]. Journal of Northeastern University Natural Science, 2020, 41(9): 1356-1362.
[4]	LIANG Li， XING Guan-hua， REN Yi-peng， SUN Shuang. Reliability Evaluation on Stay Cables Based on Cloud Theory [J]. Journal of Northeastern University Natural Science, 2019, 40(4): 585-589.
[5]	WANG Shu-hong， ZHANG Ze， HOU Wen-shuai， WANG Fei-li. Risk Assessment Method on Multi-disaster Coupled Hazard for Urban Utility Tunnel [J]. Journal of Northeastern University Natural Science, 2018, 39(6): 902-906.
[6]	LIANG Li， LIU Qi， LI Ming. Dam-Break Risk Assessment Model of Tailings Reservoir Based on Variable Weight Synthesis and Analytic Hierarchy Process [J]. Journal of Northeastern University Natural Science, 2017, 38(12): 1790-1794.
[7]	CAO Chen， LI Hui-zhong， CHEN Jian-ping， ZHENG Lian-jing. Rock Quality Evaluation of Dam Foundation Based on Component and Cloud Model Weighting Method [J]. Journal of Northeastern University Natural Science, 2017, 38(11): 1643-1647.
[8]	XUE Xi-long， WANG Xin-min， HU Yong， YANG Li. Ecological Security Effect Evaluation of Mine Based on Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process and Variable Fuzzy Sets [J]. Journal of Northeastern University Natural Science, 2016, 37(1): 94-99.
[9]	FANG Zheng， CHEN Juan-juan， XIE Tao ， WAN Xin. Fire Risk Assessment of Malls Based on the Cluster Analysis and AHP [J]. Journal of Northeastern University Natural Science, 2015, 36(3): 442-447.
[10]	JIANG Fang-fang， SONG Shao-xiu， CHENG Jia-bin， XU Hui. BCG Signal Intelligent Diagnosis Method Based on Cloud Model [J]. Journal of Northeastern University:Natural Science, 2015, 36(10): 1374-1377.
[11]	GAO Chengkang， LIU Zhengwen， TANG Hanmei， CHEN Shuteng. Surveying and Analyzing Residents Awareness of Light Pollution [J]. Journal of Northeastern University, 2013, 34(8): 1210-1212.
[12]	ZHAO Wen， GUAN Yongping， LI Shengang， JI Xinbo. Numerical Analysis on the Effect of LargeSpan Unloading on Underlying Shield Tunnel [J]. Journal of Northeastern University, 2013, 34(5): 704-707.
[13]	YU Zhao-ji， JIN Zhong， ZHAO Shuai. Evaluation of E-commerce Online Reputation Influenced by Seller Behaviors [J]. Journal of Northeastern University:Natural Science, 2013, 34(1): 149-152.