期刊文献+

基于RMR的模糊AHP法在岩体分级中的应用 被引量:6

APPLICATION OF RMR BASED FUZZY AHP METHOD TO ROCK MASS CLASSIFICATION
下载PDF
导出
摘要 传统的RMR法采用固定评估因素、固定评分方式进行岩体分级,其评分过程中存在着许多不确定性和主观性,在地质条件复杂的情况下岩体分级效果差。为了改变RMR法存在的不足,本文在参考RMR法的基础之上,提出了将AHP法应用于岩体分级的方案,给出了模型计算流程。将岩体分级看作一个多属性决策问题,根据实际情况可随机加入或减少影响岩体质量的评估因素,集合专家的意见重新确定各评估因素的权重值、建立相应的评分准则,然后通过迭代法计算岩体质量总评分再进行岩体分级。针对AHP法无法解决的模糊问题,在模型计算流程中引入了模糊理论进行相关处理,并编程实现该流程。最后将此方案应用于大湾隧道进行岩体分级,分级结果与RMR法的结果进行对比分析,结果显示模糊AHP法的岩体分级结果与实际情况更加吻合。 The traditional RMR method is especially focused on constant rating parameters and the form of giving scores.So there is no doubt that it has many indeterminate and subjective factors in the process of rating and cannot get an adequate result under complicated geologic environment.In order to improve the RMR method,this paper puts forward the AHP method to use in rock mass classification.Under this method,the rock mass classification is viewed as a group decision problem.It can readjust the rating parameters based on real geologic environment and calculate parameters' proportion,establish corresponding evaluation criterion.Then it can calculate rock mass total score which is used for the rating.The fuzzy logic theory is used in AHP method to solve fuzzy problem in fact.At last,this new method has been used in the rock mass classification of Dwan tunnel.Compared to the RMR method result for this instance,the classification result of AHP method is closer to the fact.
作者 李华 焦彦杰
出处 《工程地质学报》 CSCD 北大核心 2011年第5期648-655,共8页 Journal of Engineering Geology
基金 中国地质调查局项目(1212010880402)资助
关键词 RMR法 AHP法 岩体分级 模糊理论 Rock Mass Rating(RMR) method AHP method Rock mass classification Fuzzy logic theory
  • 相关文献

参考文献18

  • 1杜时贵,许四法,杨树峰,程俊杰,王思敬.岩石质量指标RQD与工程岩体分类[J].工程地质学报,2000,8(3):351-356. 被引量:41
  • 2杨泽平,李海兵,曾夏生.层次分析法在工程岩体分类中的应用[J].工程地质学报,2006,14(6):830-834. 被引量:10
  • 3Byung-Sik Chun,Woong Ryul Ryu, Myung Sagong and Jong-Nam Do Indirect estimation of the rock deformation modulus based on polynomial and multiple regression analyses of the RMR system. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, 2009, 46:649 -658.
  • 4Goel RK, Jethwa JL, Paithankar AG. Correlation between Barton's Q and Bieniawski's RMR-A new approach. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, Geomech. Abstr, 1996, 33 : 179 - 181.
  • 5SY Choi, HD Park. Comparison among different criteria of RMR and Q-system for rock mass classification for tunneling in Korea . Tumreling and Underground Space Technology, 2002, 17:391- 401.
  • 6Hsu TH. Transportation project evaluations: A fuzzy measure AHP. Proceedings of NSC, Part C, 1997,7 ( 1 ) : 26 - 34.
  • 7Ishikawa A, Amagasa T, Tamizawa G., Totsuta R and Mieno H. The max-min delphi method and fuzzy delphi method via fuzzy integra- tion. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1993, 55:241 -253.
  • 8Hsu HM and Chen CT. Aggregation of fuzzy opinions under group decision making . Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1996,79 ( 3 ) : 279 - 285.
  • 9Lee SK, Mogi G, Kim JW. A fuzzy analytic hierarchy process ap- proach for assessing national competitiveness in the hydrogen tech- nology sector. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2008,33 (23) : 6840 - 6848.
  • 10Lee SK, Mogi G, Kim JW. Decision support for prioritizing energy technologies against high oil prices: A fuzzy analytic hierarchy process approach . Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process In- dustries, 2009,22 : 915 - 920.

二级参考文献50

共引文献382

同被引文献81

引证文献6

二级引证文献27

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部