期刊文献+

基于因子分析的地铁盾构施工沉降风险辨识 被引量:6

Risk Identification of Ground Settlement in Subway Shield Tunneling Construction Based on Factor Analysis
下载PDF
导出
摘要 根据地铁盾构施工特点,从盾构始发与到达阶段、盾构正常掘进阶段和特殊节点工程三个方面对地铁盾构施工工作过程进行结构分解,建立WBS工作分解树.从人、机、料、法、环对地铁盾构施工沉降风险进行分解,建立RBS风险分解树.通过WBS-RBS矩阵,全面辨识出38个影响地铁盾构施工沉降风险因素.对风险因素进行问卷调查及信度检验,结果显示调查样本的Cronbach’Alpha值均大于0.7,每个一级指标下的所属项目与量表总计相关值均大于0.2,量表数据可信.采用因子分析法对指标的相关性进行KMO和Bartlett球形检验,结果显示指标具有很强的相关性.采用SPSS18.0软件进行主成分分析,识别和提取出地铁盾构施工地表沉降风险16大关键因子,使指标数量大为减少,指标之间的相关性得以降低. On the basis of characteristic of subway shield tunneling construction,work breakdown structure is carried out in subway shield construction from three main stages of shield launching and shield break-through,shield regular excavation,and special node engineering to generate the WBS tree.Risk breakdown structure is carried out from four aspects of " Manpower-Management", "Machine", " Materials", " Method" and " Environment" to generate RBS tree.Basecd on WBS-RBS,38 risk factors are identified absolutely for questionnaire surveys and reliability tests.The results show that Cronbach'Alpha values of the samples are more than 0.7,and the total correlation values of the items in each level are more than 0.2.It reveals that the data of the questionnaire is reliable.Furthermore,the Kasier-Meyer-Olkin measure and Bartlett's spherical test are carried out with factor analysis to checkout the correlation of indexes.The results show that the index has a strong correlation.By using SPSS18.0software with principal component analysis,16 key factors are extracted to reduce the number of indexes and the correlation.
作者 黄俐 梁鹏
出处 《内蒙古大学学报(自然科学版)》 CAS 北大核心 2016年第2期209-216,共8页 Journal of Inner Mongolia University:Natural Science Edition
基金 广东省自然科学基金项目(2015A030310164)
关键词 地铁盾构施工 沉降风险 WBS-RBS 因子分析 subway shield tunneling construction ground settlement risk WBS-RBS factor analysis
  • 相关文献

参考文献7

二级参考文献28

  • 1黄艳敏,郝建新.WBS-RBS法在城市轨道工程风险辨识中的应用[J].都市快轨交通,2004,17(4):9-12. 被引量:30
  • 2张成平,张顶立,王梦恕.深圳地铁施工影响区环境安全与第三方监测[J].中国安全科学学报,2004,14(5):47-50. 被引量:18
  • 3何锡兴,周红波,姚浩.上海某深基坑工程风险识别与模糊评估[J].岩土工程学报,2006,28(B11):1912-1915. 被引量:66
  • 4MATSUO M, KAWAMURA K. A design method of deep excavation in cohesive soil based on the reliability theory[J]. Soils and foundations, 1980, 20(1): 61 --75.
  • 5BJERRUM L, EIDE O. Stability of strutted excavation in clay[J]. Geoteehnique,1996, 6(1): 32--47.
  • 6CHOI H H, CHO H N, SEO J W. Risk assessment methodology for underground construction projects[J]. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 2004, 3:258--272.
  • 7XU T H, BI S P, CHEN J R. Safety management of deep foundation pit based on construction risk analysis[C]// 2008 Isecs International Colloquium on Computing, Communication, Control, and Management. [S. 1.]: [s. n.], 2008, 3: 268--272.
  • 8HUCHZERMEIER A, LOCH C H. Project management under risk: Using the real options approach to evaluate flexibility in R & D[J]. Management Science, 2001, 47: 85--101.
  • 9WANG J C, HOU W H, WANG X Z. Analysis of accident and risk sources factors for deep foundation pit[J]. Progress in Safety Science and Technology, 2005, (5): 476--481.
  • 10刘军.地铁五号线发生施工事故工程主体结构未受影响[EB/OL].http://new.sohu.com,2003.10.10.

共引文献403

同被引文献45

引证文献6

二级引证文献26

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