地下岩溶发育程度评价体系的初步探讨
Preliminary Study of Assessment System for Subsurface Karst Development Degree

为了对下岩溶液发育状况进行初步的判断，从而为岩溶区地下工程的规划与施工提供指导，采用定量与定性相结合的方法建立一套地下岩溶发育程度的评价体系，其评价结果可以用来对下岩溶发育状况进行初步的判断.首先，选取了6个影响岩溶发育的主要因素作为地下岩溶发育程度的评价指标，并对地下岩溶的不同发育程度等级进行定义；其次，采用基于模糊层次分析法与贝叶斯网络法的综合赋权法确定了各个因素对于岩溶发育影响的权重，并基于层次分析法确定了评价指标各状态的统一评分标准；最后，采用对比分析的方法确立了各个岩溶发育程度等级所对应的定量评价值的范围.为了检验该评价系统的实用性，该系统被应用于某岩溶区的铁路隧道工程当中.通过地预测评价结果与实际记录结果的对比分析可得：占隧道总长度97.1%的区域的地下岩溶发育程度的评价结果与实际岩溶发育状况相一致，只有2.9%的区域的评价结果产生了误差；在评价结果产生误差的这一区域，岩溶发育程度的定量评价值为0.69，岩溶发育程度被评价为"发育"，十分接近实际发育状况"强烈发育"所属的定量值范围0.70~1.00，验证了该地下岩溶发育程度评价系统的的可靠性.
：An attempt was made to establish an assessment system for subsurface karst development by combining quantitative and qualitative methods. The assessment results can assist the preliminary determination of the extent of underground karst development and guide the planning and construction of underground engineering projects. Firstly, the major factors influencing the karst development were selected as the assessment indices in the system, and the varying degrees of subsurface karst development are defined. Then, the weights of these assessment indices were determined using a synthetic weighting method, in which the fuzzy hierarchy analytic process determines the qualitative weights, while the quantitative weights were determined by a sensitivity analysis of the Bayesian belief network. The Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process was used to determine the ratings of the karst development states in the assessment indices. Moreover, based on the statistical data, the quantitative assessment results belonging to each degree of karst development were determined by comparing the calculated assessment results with the real karst development status. The proposed assessment system was applied to a railway tunnelling project in China to evaluate the degree of surface karst development before tunnel construction. A comparative analysis of the assessment results with the recorded results shows that the assessment of the tunnel zone, accounting for 97.1% of the total tunnel length, is consistent with the recorded results. Assessment errors only occur in 2.9% of the tunnel zone, where the degree of karst development was assigned as "developed", while the records indicated it was "extremely developed". However, the quantitative assessment result of the karst development degree is 0.69, which is close to the value range of "extremely developed", 0.70-1.00. As this minor error is acceptable in the preliminary assessment of the degree of karst development, the proposed assessment system is verifiably reliable