梁涛+邹道光杨丰华李蕊张久鹏裴建中



文章编号:1000033X(2016)12011805
收稿日期:20160520
摘要:运用层次分析法和模糊综合评判法评价台背回填工程的质量,并对回填工程的实际沉降监测数据与评价结果进行比较。结果表明:用层次分析法得到的评价结果比用模糊综合评判法得到的结果更准确;但层次分析法仅能判断台背回填质量的相对优劣,而模糊综合评判可给出各台背回填工程的分数,可同时对大量回填工程的质量进行评判。
关键词:台背回填;质量评价;层次分析;模糊综合评判
中图分类号:U414.03文献标志码:B
Quality Assessment of Backfilling of Highway Bridge Abutment
LIANG Tao1, ZOU Daoguang2, YANG Fenghua3, LI Rui2, ZHANG Jiupeng2, PEI Jianzhong2
(1. Tongchuan Highway Administration, Tongchuan 727031, Shaanxi, China; 2. School of Highway,
Changan University, Xian 710064, Shaanxi,China; 3. Department of Management Engineering,
Shaanxi Railway Institute, Weinan 714000, Shaanxi, China)
Abstract: To evaluate the construction quality of backfilling of highway bridge abutment, analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation(FCE) methods were applied to make a comparison, and the settlement monitoring data of abutment backfilling were used to validate the reliability of the methods. Furthermore, the scope of application was analyzed. The study shows AHP is more accurate when compared with FCE. The former method can only decide the relative merits of given backfilling, while the latter can grade the construction of a great number of backfilling projects and evaluate the quality simultaneously.
Key words: abutment backfilling; quality assessment; analytic hierarchy process; fuzzy comprehensive evaluation
0引言
随着高速公路的建设,桥梁、隧道和涵洞等构筑物所占比重不断增大[13]。许多工程在建成通车不久后就出现大量病害,其中台背回填中路桥过渡段出现的桥头“跳车”是最常见的病害类型之一,给道路结构及驾驶员带来的安全隐患不容小觑[45]。
很多研究者运用力学模型和数学方法构建台背回填路堤的沉降预测模型以及桥台对台后填土的力学响应模型,分析桥头“跳车”的动力响应问题等[68]。在台背回填中哪种设计因素或哪个回填措施的改变对台背回填的质量影响更大,是施工的关键。因此,适当分析已有台背回填方案,找到台背回填质量控制的关键因素,是本文研究的主要内容。
1评价模型的选择
按照使用的数学方法,一般的数学模型主要分为3类:确定性模型、随机性模型和模糊性模型。确定性模型是指实际研究对象之间具有明确关系,可用方程式、网络结构图等表示的关系,使用的方法多为经典数学方法;……