作者中心
专家审稿
编委审稿
主编审稿
SUSCEPTIBILITY AND RISK ASSESSMENT OF GEOLOGICAL DISASTERS IN XINJIANG BASED ON EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION
-
摘要: 新疆是丝绸之路经济带的核心区，其孕灾地质环境条件与我国中东部地区存在较大差异性，是全国受地质灾害影响较严重省区之一。面对新疆地区面积大和特殊的孕灾地质环境条件，先将全疆划分为4个区域开展易发性和危险性评价工作，并选取局部高差、坡度、地貌类型、工程地质岩组、平均温度、平均降雨量、归一化植被指数(NDVI)以及雪线分布等评价指标因子，通过证据权模型对新疆地区地质灾害易发性进行评价，并在地质灾害易发性评价基础上叠加最大降雨量作为地质灾害危险性诱发因素，最后通过专家打分矩阵分析法对全疆地质灾害危险性进行评价。研究结果表明：全疆共划分为8个地质灾害高易发区和极高危险区，主要分布在准噶尔西部山地、阿尔泰山、伊犁谷地山区、天山北麓、吐哈盆地、天山南麓、南疆西部天山、西昆仑山以及东昆仑山等地区；以全疆17 362处地质灾害点为样本数据，经验证共有96.16%灾害点分布在高、中、低易发区；以全疆2011~2022年发生的336起地质灾害点为样本数据，经验证共有326起地质灾害分布在极高、高、中危险区，占比达到97.02%。研究结果可为新疆地区最大程度降低地质灾害风险提供科学依据，也可为其他省级区域开展地质灾害易发性和危险性评价工作提供重要参考。Abstract: Xinjiang is the core area of the Silk Road Economic Belt. Its geological hazard-prone environmental conditions differ significantly from those of the central and eastern regions of China, making it one of the provinces with severe geological hazard impact in the country. This article focuses on the large area and special geological hazard-prone environmental conditions of Xinjiang, divides the whole region into four areas for the assessment of hazard susceptibility and danger. Evaluation indicators such as local elevation difference, slope, terrain type, engineering geology lithology, average temperature, average rainfall, NDVI, and snowline distribution were selected, and an evidence weight model is used to evaluate the hazard susceptibility of the region. Based on the assessment of hazard susceptibility, the maximum rainfall is added as a geological hazard danger-inducing factor. The hazard danger of the entire region is evaluated through the expert scoring matrix method. The research results show that the entire region is divided into eight high susceptibility and extremely high hazard geological disaster-prone areas, mainly distributed in the western part of the Junggar Mountain, Altai Mountain, Ili Valley Mountainous Area, the northern foothills of Tianshan Mountains, Tuha Basin, the southern foothills of Tianshan Mountains, Western Tianshan Mountains in southern Xinjiang, Western Kunlun Mountains, and Eastern Kunlun Mountains, etc. Based on the sample data of geological disaster points in the whole region, it is verified that 96.16% of the disaster points are distributed in high, medium, and low susceptibility areas. Based on the sample data of 336 geological disasters that occurred in Xinjiang from 2011 to 2022,it was verified that 326 geological disasters are distributed in extremely high, high and medium danger areas, accounting for a ratio of 97.02%. The research results can provide a scientific basis for minimizing geological hazard risks to the greatest extent in Xinjiang, and also provide important technical references for other provincial-level regions to carry out susceptibility and risk assessments of geological disasters.
-
Key words:
- Geological hazards /
- Susceptibility /
- Risk assessment /
- Weight of evidence /
- Xinjiang
-
图 2 新疆地区地质灾害易发性评价示意图
Figure 2. Susceptibility evaluation diagram of the whole Xinjiang region
图 4 2011~2022年地质灾害灾情统计
Figure 4. Statistics of geological disaster losses from 2011 to 2022
表 2 新疆地区危险性评价数据来源
Table 2. Data sources for risk assessment in Xinjiang region
序号 收集底图 备注 1 降水数据
(瞿莉莎等，2022)时间分辨率：逐月
空间分辨率：1 km2 灾情数据 新疆维吾尔自治区地质环境监测院 
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 新疆地区易发性评价指标因子
Table 3. Vulnerability evaluation index factors in Xinjiang region
序号 一级评价指标 二级评价指标 1 局部高差/m ≤16 ≤43 ≤77 ≤118 ≤178 ≤327 ≤1623 2 坡度/(°) 0~45 45~55 55~90 3 坡向/(°) 平面(-1) 北(0~22.5) 东北(22.5~67.5) 东(67.5~112.5) 东南(112.5~157.5) 南(157.5~202.5) 西南(202.5~247.5) 西(247.5~292.5) 西北(292.5~337.5) 北(337.5~360) 4 地貌分区 平原区 低山、丘陵区 中、高山区 极高山区 沙漠区 5 距断裂距离/m 0~1000 1000~1500 1500~2000 2000~2500 2500~100000 6 2016~2020年4月与9月平均降雨量
(0.1 mm)≤69.96 ≤128.17 ≤194.695 ≤257.063 ≤327.746 ≤402.587 ≤477.428 ≤556.427 ≤639.584 ≤1072 7 NDVI ≤0.079 ≤0.137 ≤0.209 ≤0.299 ≤0.4 ≤0.498 ≤0.584 ≤0.678 ≤0.768 ≤0.92 8 雪线/m 阿尔泰山：2500 天山：3100 西昆仑/喀喇昆仑：4400 东昆仑：4100
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 新疆地区地质灾害易发性评价分区统计表
Table 4. Statistical table of geological hazard susceptibility assessment zoning in Xinjiang region
易发性分区 崩塌/个 滑坡/个 泥石流/个 地面塌陷/个 占比/% 高易发区 2872 2864 1315 79 41.07 中易发区 3691 798 1433 94 34.65 低易发区 1817 453 1014 264 20.44 非易发区 465 59 95 49 3.84 总计 8845 4174 3857 486 100
下载: 导出CSV
表 5 阿尔泰山地区地质灾害危险性等级划分建议表
Table 5. Proposal table for hazard level classification in the Altai Mountains region
易发性 降雨等级 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 高 极高 极高 极高 高 高 高 高 中 中 极高 高 高 高 高 高 中 中 低 高 中 中 中 中 中 中 低 非 低 低 低 低 低 低 低 低
下载: 导出CSV
表 6 天山地区地质灾害危险性等级划分建议表
Table 6. Proposal table for hazard level classification in the Tianshan Mountains region
易发性 降雨等级 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 高 极高 极高 极高 高 高 高 高 中 中 极高 高 高 高 中 中 中 中 低 高 中 中 中 中 中 低 低 非 低 低 低 低 低 低 低 低
下载: 导出CSV
表 7 昆仑山地区地质灾害危险性等级划分建议表
Table 7. Proposal table for hazard level classification in the Kunlun Mountains region
易发性 降雨等级 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 高 极高 极高 极高 极高 极高 高 高 高 中 高 高 高 高 高 高 中 中 低 高 中 中 中 中 中 中 低 非 低 低 低 低 低 低 低 低
下载: 导出CSV
表 8 新疆地区极高危险区代表性地质灾害案例分析表
Table 8. Analysis of representative geological hazards in extremely high risk areas of Xinjiang region
案例 时间 灾害特征 灾情统计 成灾模式 叶城县柯克亚乡特大型泥石流灾害 2016年
7月6日泥石流位于叶城县柯克亚乡西部，诱发成因是当地突降历史罕见特大暴雨，引发提孜那甫河沿岸多起中小型滑坡，堵塞沟谷溃决后形成特大型稀性泥石流灾害，泥石流堆积体达60 000 m3 造成35人死亡、7人失踪、8人受伤，受灾人口达119 414人，直接经济损失28 600万元 滑坡-堰塞坝-溃决泥石流 精河县八家户农场大型滑坡灾害 2014年
7月4日滑坡位于精河县八家户农场牧业三队夏草场，滑坡堆积物体积约500×104 m3。临滑前几天当地气温急剧升高，滑坡体的季节性冻土快速融化，在水的作用下滑坡体抗滑力急剧下降，造成滑坡灾害发生 造成6人死亡，受灾人口8人，直接经济损失986万元 高温-季节性冻土融化-滑坡体抗滑力下降 新源县阿勒玛勒镇哈茵德萨依泥石流 2015年
5月12日泥石流位于新源县阿勒玛勒镇哈茵德萨伊沟，属于暴雨融雪沟谷型泥石流，形成区分布有8处滑坡群，沟域平面形态为口袋状，主要固体物质来源为沟道侵蚀物源、滑坡类物源等 淤埋或冲毁交通道路、水利设施、农田、草场，以及部分牲畜棚圈，损失41只羊，2匹马，直接经济损失约500万元，所幸预警及时，未造成人员伤亡 滑坡-堰塞坝-溃决泥石流
下载: 导出CSV
-
Bi J A,Xu P H,Song S Y,et al. 2022. Assessment of the susceptibility to geological hazards in the Manas River Basin based on the coupled information value-logistic regression model[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 30(5): 1549-1560. Chen J, Yu H Y, Zhang T K, et al. 2023. Landslide susceptibility evaluation of information model based on correlation analysis factor selection[J]. Energy and Environment, (2): 107-110. Deng B, Zhang H, Bai J, et al. 2022. Hazard evaluation of the slope in Shenzhen based on airborne LiDAR data[J/OL]. Geomatics and Information Science of Wuhan University, 2022-11-24, https://doi.org/10.13203/j.whugis20220141 .Deng H, He Z W, Chen Y, et al. 2014. Application of information quantity model to hazard evaluation of geological disaster in mountainous region environment: A case study of Luding County, Sichuan Province[J]. Journal of Natural Disasters, 23 (2): 67-76. Fan X F, Zhao Y J, Yang L J. 2023. Susceptibility evaluation of geological disaster in Liuzhi special zone of Guizhou based on information quantity model[J]. Engineering and Technological Research, 8 (6): 20-22. Ge Q Q, Sun Q, Zhang N, et al. 2023. Evaluation of geological hazard susceptibility of Baiyin City Based on MT-InSAR deformation measurements[J/OL]. Geomatics and Information Science of Wuhan University, 2023-04-04, https://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/42.1676.TN.20230403.1759.004.html .Guan Y. 2015. Research on the evaluation of risk factors and model about geological disasters in Xinjiang[D]. Fuxin: Liaoning Technical University. Hu G S, Shang Y J, Zeng Q L, et al. 2017. The emergency scientific investigation of catastrophic debris flow in Yecheng County of Xinjiang on July 6th, 2016[J]. Mountain Research, 35 (1): 112-116. Li C B, Song Y, Qi X Y. 2019. Evaluation of geological hazards in Urumqi urban area based on ArcGIS information model[J]. Xinjiang Geology, 37 (1): 34-39. Li X, Xue G C, Liu C Z, et al. 2022. Evaluation of geohazard susceptibility based on information value model and information valuelogistic regression model: A case study of the central mountainous area of Hainan Island[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 28 (2): 294-305. Liang S C, Qiao H, Lü D, et al. 2023. Study on distribution characteristics and main controlling factors of geohazards in Ili Valley[J]. Arid Land Geography, 46(6): 880-888. Liu K, Tian C L, Xu F L. 2023. Susceptibility assessment of geological disasters in Sishui County based on the coupling model of Information Content and Analytic Hierarchy Process method[J]. Geological Survey of China, 10 (2): 77-86. Liu T M, Guo Y J, Liu Y L. 2023. Evaluation of geological disaster susceptibility based on sample optimization by clustering algorithm[J]. Yangtze River, 54 (3): 117-124. Liu S, Zhu J Y, Yang D H, et al. 2023. Geological hazard assessment of collapse and landslide under different rainfall conditions[J]. Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology, 2023-05-17, https://doi.org/10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.tb20220448 .Liu Y L, Hong W, Tang J. 2023. Geological risk assessment of Sanjiang Sub-district in Yongjia County based on comprehensive index method[J]. Gansu Water Resources and Hydropower Technology, 59 (1): 46-49, 53. Liu Z C, Chen C L. 2020. Achievements and countermeasures in risk reduction of geological disasters in China[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 28 (2): 375-383. Meng F Q, Gao F, Lin B, et al. 2023. Evaluation of geological disaster susceptibility in eastern Shandong based on AHP and information model[J]. Journal of Catastrophology, 38 (3): 111-117. Qiu H J. 2012. Study on the regional landslide characteristic analysis and hazard assessment: A case study of Ningqiang County[D]. Xi'an: Northwest University. Qu L S, Zhu Q A, Zhu C F, et al. 2022. Monthly precipitation dataset with 1 km resolution in China from 1960 to 2020[DS/OL]. Science Data Bank. Sun J F, Ma C, Hu J S, et al. 2023. Susceptibility evaluation of geological hazard by coupling grey relational degree and analytic hierarchy process: A case of Chongtou Town, Yunhe County, Zhejiang Province[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 31 (2): 538-551. Tang C, Ma G C. 2015. Small regional geohazards susceptibility mapping based on geomorphic unit[J]. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 35 (1): 91-98. Wang D W, Ying Z C. 2020. Risk assessment of geological disasters in Yunyan area based on analytic hierarchy process[J]. Engineering and Technological Research, 5 (9): 271-273. Wang M. 2014. Study on geological characteristics and susceptibility in Wushi County[D]. Nanjing: Nanjing University. Wang W Z, Cao X H, Wang X, et al. 2022. Assessment of the susceptibility to landside hazards in Yining County based on information value method[J]. Xinjiang Geology, 40 (4): 566-573. Wen X, Fan X M, Chen L, et al. 2022. Susceptibility assessment of geological disasters based on an information value model: A case of Gulin County in Southeast Sichuan[J]. Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology, 41 (2): 290-299. Yang K, Xue X C, Duan Z, et al. 2021. Risk assessment of geological hazards in Zichang County based on AHP-LR entropy combined model[J]. Science Technology and Engineering, 21 (27): 11551-11560. Yu K N, Wu T, Wei A H, et al. 2023. Geological hazard assessment based on the models of AHP, catastrophe theory and their combination: A case study in Pingshan County of Heibei Province[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 34 (2): 146-155. Zeng Q L, Shang Y J, Hu G S, et al. 2016. Investigation and mechanism of the landslide-debris flow hazards on July 6 in Yecheng county, Xinjiang[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 24 (6): 1145-1156. Zhao L, Sheng Y. 2015. Permafrost survey manual[M]. Beijing: Science Press. Zhou D Y, Zhuo X Q, Xi W F. 2021. Combined SBAS-InSAR and PSO-BP algorithm for evaluating the risk of geological disasters in alpine valley regions[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 37 (23): 108-116. 毕结昂, 徐佩华, 宋盛渊, 等. 2022. 基于信息量-逻辑回归耦合模型的玛纳斯河流域地质灾害易发性评价[J]. 工程地质学报, 30 (5): 1549-1560. doi: 10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2022-0327 陈君, 于浩洋, 张童康, 等. 2023. 基于相关性分析法因子选取的信息量模型滑坡易发性评价[J]. 能源与环境, (2): 107-110. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-FJNJ202302032.htm 邓博, 张会, 柏君, 等. 2023. 利用机载LiDAR的深圳斜坡类地质灾害危险性评价[J/OL]. 武汉大学学报(信息科学版), 2022-11-24, https://doi.org/10.13203/j.whugis20220141 .邓辉, 何政伟, 陈晔, 等. 2014. 信息量模型在山地环境地质灾害危险性评价中的应用——以四川泸定县为例[J]. 自然灾害学报, 23 (2): 67-76. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZRZH201402010.htm 范希飞, 赵叶江, 杨丽君. 2023. 基于信息量模型的贵州六枝特区地质灾害易发性评价[J]. 工程技术研究, 8 (6): 20-22. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YJCO202306006.htm 盖侨侨, 孙倩, 张宁, 等. 2023. 融合时序InSAR形变的白银市地质灾害易发性评价[J/OL]. 武汉大学学报(信息科学版), 2023-04-04, https://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/42.1676.TN.20230403.1759.004.html .关颖. 2015. 新疆地区地质灾害危险因子评估与评价模型研究[D]. 阜新: 辽宁工程技术大学. 胡桂胜, 尚彦军, 曾庆利, 等. 2017. 新疆叶城"7·6"特大灾害性泥石流应急科学调查[J]. 山地学报, 35 (1): 112-116. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SDYA201701014.htm 李崇博, 宋玉, 戚向阳. 2019. 基于ArcGIS信息量模型在乌鲁木齐市城区地质灾害易发性评价的效果分析[J]. 新疆地质, 37 (1): 34-39. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XJDI201901007.htm 李信, 薛桂澄, 柳长柱, 等. 2022. 基于信息量模型和信息量-逻辑回归模型的海南岛中部山区地质灾害易发性研究[J]. 地质力学学报, 28 (2): 294-305. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DZLX202202012.htm 梁世川, 乔华, 吕东, 等. 2023. 伊犁谷地地质灾害分布特征及主控因素分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 46(6): 880-888. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GHDL202306003.htm 刘传正, 陈春利. 2020. 中国地质灾害防治成效与问题对策[J]. 工程地质学报, 28 (2): 375-383. doi: 10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2019-232 刘康, 田臣龙, 徐凤琳. 2023. 基于信息量-层次分析耦合模型的泗水县地质灾害易发性评价[J]. 中国地质调查, 10 (2): 77-86. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DZDC202302010.htm 刘帅, 朱杰勇, 杨得虎, 等. 2023. 不同降雨工况条件下的崩滑地质灾害危险性评价[J/OL]. 地质科技通报, 2023-05-17, https://doi.org/10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.tb20220448 .刘铁铭, 郭有金, 刘艳领. 2023. 基于聚类算法优化样本的地质灾害易发性评价[J]. 人民长江, 54 (3): 117-124. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-RIVE202303018.htm 刘彦麟, 洪伟, 唐军. 2023. 基于综合指数法的永嘉县三江街道地质灾害危险性评价[J]. 甘肃水利水电技术, 59 (1): 46-49, 53. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GSSJ202301010.htm 孟凡奇, 高峰, 林波, 等. 2023. 基于AHP和信息量模型的地质灾害易发性评价——以鲁东片区为例[J]. 灾害学, 38 (3): 111-117. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZHXU202303018.htm 邱海军. 2012. 区域滑坡崩塌地质灾害特征分析及其易发性和危险性评价研究——以宁强县为例[D]. 西安: 西北大学. 瞿莉莎, 朱求安, 朱超凡, 等. 2022.1960~2020年中国1 km分辨率月降水数据集[DS/OL]. Science Data Bank. 孙剑锋, 马超, 胡金树, 等. 2023. 基于灰色关联度与层次分析法耦合的地质灾害易发性评价——以浙江省云和县崇头镇为例[J]. 工程地质学报, 31 (2): 538-551. doi: 10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2022-0542 唐川, 马国超. 2015. 基于地貌单元的小区域地质灾害易发性分区方法研究[J]. 地理科学, 35 (1): 91-98. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DLKX201501011.htm 王定武, 应智超. 2020. 基于层次分析法的云岩区地质灾害危险性评价[J]. 工程技术研究, 5 (9): 271-273. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YJCO202009129.htm 王敏. 2014. 新疆乌什县地质灾害发育特征及易发性评价研究[D]. 南京: 南京大学. 王伟中, 曹小红, 汪鑫, 等. 2022. 基于信息量法的新疆伊宁县滑坡灾害易发性评价[J]. 新疆地质, 40 (4): 566-573. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XJDI202204015.htm 温鑫, 范宣梅, 陈兰, 等. 2022. 基于信息量模型的地质灾害易发性评价: 以川东南古蔺县为例[J]. 地质科技通报, 41 (2): 290-299. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DZKQ202202030.htm 杨康, 薛喜成, 段钊, 等. 2021. 基于AHP-LR熵组合模型的子长市地质灾害危险性评价[J]. 科学技术与工程, 21 (27): 11551-11560. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-KXJS202127013.htm 于开宁, 吴涛, 魏爱华, 等. 2023. 基于AHP-突变理论组合模型的地质灾害危险性评价——以河北平山县为例[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报, 34 (2): 146-155. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGDH202302015.htm 曾庆利, 尚彦军, 胡桂胜, 等. 2016. 新疆叶城"7·6"滑坡泥石流灾害调查与形成机理研究[J]. 工程地质学报, 24 (6): 1145-1156. doi: 10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2016.06.014 赵林, 盛煜. 2015. 多年冻土调查手册[M]. 北京: 科学出版社. 周定义, 左小清, 喜文飞, 等. 2021. 联合SBAS-InSAR和PSO-BP算法的高山峡谷区地质灾害危险性评价[J]. 农业工程学报, 37 (23): 108-116. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NYGU202123013.htm -
点击查看大图
图(4) / 表(8)
计量
- 文章访问数: 177
- HTML全文浏览量: 44
- PDF下载量: 72
- 被引次数: 0
