基于SWOT分析法高铁黄河桥位方案比选研究

Comparison and Selection of High Speed Railway Bridge Site on the Yellow River Based on SWOT Analysis

随着社会不断发展,城市内有限的黄河桥位成为稀缺资源,这就需要设计者运用科学方法对高铁黄河桥位进行细致研究。本文以济滨高铁跨越黄河比选方案为例,运用SWOT分析法对不同跨越黄河桥位方案进行分析,找出影响线路方案的内部和外部因素,根据具体情况分别给予科学合理赋值,构建SWOT矩阵,得出不同方案在矩阵图坐标象限的位置,再通过进一步分析,得出较为科学的推荐方案。为使方案更为合理,对推荐方案制定相应的行动计划,最大限度促使向利于方案优势方面发展,如公铁合建桥梁推荐桥位方案在设计中可以采取进一步优化设计,降低结构高度以满足机场净空要求,结合公路设计综合比选方案,尽量降低工程投资,减少与其他方案投资差额,促使劣势向优势方面转换,减少不利因素,扩大优势,最终使工程项目可实施性更强,更加科学合理。

With the continuous development of the society,the limited Yellow River bridge sites in the city have become a scarce resource,which requires designers to use scientific methods to carefully study the Yellow River bridge sites of high-speed railway.This paper takes the Jinan-Binzhou High-speed Railway crossing the Yellow River as an example of comparative selection scheme,and uses SWOT analysis method to analyze different bridge crossing the Yellow River scheme.The internal and external factors affecting the route scheme are found out,and scientific and reasonable values are given according to the specific situation,SWOT matrix is constructed,and the position of different schemes in the coordinate quadrant of the matrix diagram is obtained.After further analysis,a more scientific recommendation scheme is obtained.To make the plan more reasonable,corresponding action plans are developed for the recommended plan to maximize the development towards the advantages of the plan.For example,the recommended bridge location scheme for the joint construction of highway and railway bridges can be further optimized in the design to reduce the structural height and meet the airport clearance requirements.Combined with the comprehensive comparison and selection of highway design schemes,the project investment should be minimized as much as possible,and the investment gap with other schemes should be reduced to promote the conversion of disadvantages to advantages,reduce adverse factors and expand advantages,and finally make the project more implementable,scientific and reasonable.