黄土丘陵沟壑区坡体稳定性影响因素分析

张庚; 王志强; 朱喆

doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.03.016

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

黄土丘陵沟壑区坡体稳定性影响因素分析

更新时间：2026-04-09

- 黄土丘陵沟壑区坡体稳定性影响因素分析
- Analysis on Influencing Factors of Slope Stability in Loess Hilly and Gully Region
- 水土保持学报 2022年36卷第3期页码：107-114
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 北京师范大学地表过程与资源生态国家重点实验室,北京,100875
  2. 北京师范大学地理科学学部,北京,100075
- 作者简介：
  
  [ "张庚(1992-),男,硕士研究生,主要从事土壤侵蚀及生态灾害研究。E-mail:201621170061@mail.bnu.edu.cn" ]
- 基金信息：
  
  国家自然科学基金项目(42130701)
- DOI：10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.03.016
  中图分类号： S157.1
- 网络首发：2022-05-27，
  
  纸质出版：2022
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
张庚, 王志强, 朱喆. 黄土丘陵沟壑区坡体稳定性影响因素分析[J]. 水土保持学报, 2022,36(3):107-114.

ZHANG Geng, WANG Zhiqiang, ZHU Zhe. Analysis on Influencing Factors of Slope Stability in Loess Hilly and Gully Region[J]. 2022, 36(3): 107-114.
张庚, 王志强, 朱喆. 黄土丘陵沟壑区坡体稳定性影响因素分析[J]. 水土保持学报, 2022,36(3):107-114. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.03.016.

ZHANG Geng, WANG Zhiqiang, ZHU Zhe. Analysis on Influencing Factors of Slope Stability in Loess Hilly and Gully Region[J]. 2022, 36(3): 107-114. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.03.016.

摘要

选取黄土丘陵沟壑区纸坊沟小流域为研究区

利用高精度遥感影像(分辨率0.068 m)和DEM (分辨率0.34 m)数据

结合野外调查

对崩塌、滑塌、滑坡、脱落和陷穴等失稳体进行识别

通过统计学、敏感系数方法

利用识别失稳体数据

分析不同类型失稳体空间分布状况

定量研究不同类型失稳体的影响因子敏感程度

揭示不同类型失稳体的主控因子

进一步阐明流域坡体失稳体的空间分布规律和影响坡体稳定性的主控因子。结果表明:(1)利用高精度遥感影像

获取流域失稳体

主要是以小规模和浅层的脱落、崩塌和滑塌为主

三者面积合计为0.417 km2

占流域总面积的5.04%。(2)评价因子内部中

土壤母质的红黏土、土地利用的天然灌木林地和草地、地貌部位的沟坡、坡度＞35°、地形起伏度为0.74~3.34 m是坡体失稳发生的高敏感区域

也是崩塌、滑塌、脱落和陷穴发育共有的敏感区域。(3)影响坡体稳定性主控因子权重由大到小为土壤母质、地形起伏度、坡度、土地利用和坡向。崩塌、滑塌和脱落的主控因子与整体坡体稳定性的主控因子相同

但因子内部权重存在差异。崩塌与整体坡体稳定性影响因子顺序分布一致。滑塌主控因子权重由大到小为土壤母质＞地形起伏度＝坡度＞土地利用＞坡向＞地貌部位。脱落主控因子权重由大到小为土壤母质＞土地利用＞地形起伏度＞坡度＝坡向＞地貌部位。滑坡的主控因子为坡度和地形起伏度。陷穴的主控因子权重由大到小为土壤母质＞地形起伏度＞坡度＞坡向。

Abstract

The Zhifanggou watershed in the loess hilly and gully region was selected as the study area in this study. By high-precision remote sensing images (resolution 0.068 m) and DEM (resolution 0.34 m) data

combined with field investigations

the collapse

slide

landslide

creep and sinkhole were analyzed. The spatial distribution of different types of instability bodies were analyzed by using statistics and sensitivity coefficient methods. The main controlling factors of instability bodies were further clarified. The results showed that:(1) The instability bodies was obtained using high-precision remote sensing images

mainly in the form of small-scale and shallow shedding

collapse and slide. The total area of the three was 0.417 km2

accounting for 5.04% of the total watershed area. (2) Among the evaluation factors

the red clay of the soil parent material

the natural shrubland and grassland of the land use

the ditch slope of the landform

the slope of > 35° and RF of 0.74~3.34 m

were the highly sensitive areas where slope instability occurred. They are also the common sensitive area for collapse

slide

shedding

and sinkhole. (3) The weights of the main controlling factors affecting the stability of the slope were as following from large to small soil parent material

slope

land use and aspect. The main controlling factors of collapse

slide and shedding were the same as the overall slope stability

but their internal weights of the factors were different. The order of the weights of the main controlling factors of collapse was consistent with the overall slope stability. The weights of the main controlling factors of landslide were as follows:soil parent material > RF=slope > land use > slope aspect > landform position. The weights of the main controlling factors of shedding was soil parent material > land use > RF > slope=slope aspect > landform position. The main controlling factors of landslide were slope andRF. The weights of the main controlling factors of caverns was soil parent material > RF > slope > slope aspect.

关键词

Keywords

references

Fu B J, Wang S, Liu Y, et al. Hydrogeomorphic ecosystem responses to natural and anthropogenic changes in the Loess Plateau of China[J].Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences,2016,45(1):223-243.

刘国彬,王兵,卫伟,等.黄土高原水土流失综合治理技术及示范[J].生态学报,2016,36(22):7074-7077.

曹文洪,张晓明.新时期黄河流域水土保持与生态保护的战略思考[J].中国水土保持,2020(9):39-42.

党小虎,吴彦斌,刘国彬,等.生态建设15年黄土高原生态足迹时空变化[J].地理研究,2018,37(4):761-771.

赵超,王书芳,徐向舟,等.重力侵蚀黄土沟壑区沟坡产沙特性[J].农业工程学报,2012,28(12):140-145.

曹银真.黄土地区重力侵蚀的类型和成因[J].中国水土保持,1985(6):8-13.

王俊豪,魏云杰,梅傲霜,等.基于无人机倾斜摄影的黄土滑坡信息多维提取与应用分析[J].中国地质,2021,48(2):388-401.

杨吉山,姚文艺,马三保,等.黄土高原沟壑区小型重力侵蚀影响因素分析[J].水土保持研究,2010,17(6):5-8.

牛全福,冯尊斌,党星海,等.黄土区滑坡研究中地形因子的选取与适宜性分析[J].地球信息科学学报,2017,19(12):1584-1592.

高健健,艾琦森,郝鲁东,等.基于无人机技术的重力侵蚀影响因素研究[J].人民黄河,2020,42(10):100-103.

郑书彦.重力侵蚀分类研究[J].水土保持研究,2008,15(5):46-48.

Guo W Z, Xu X Z, Zhu T X, et al. Changes in particle size distribution of suspended sediment affected by gravity erosion:A field study on steep loess slopes[J].Journal of Soils and Sediments,2019,20(2):1730-1741.

唐川.云南怒江流域泥石流敏感性空间分析[J].地理研究,2004,24(2):177-185.

黄奕龙,陈利顶,傅伯杰,等.黄土丘陵小流域沟坡水热条件及其生态修复初探[J].自然资源学报,2004,19(2):183-189.

段钊,赵法锁,陈新建.陕北黄土高原区崩塌发育类型及影响因素分析:以吴起县为例[J].自然灾害学报,2012,21(6):142-149.

林超,李昌文.阴阳坡在山地地理研究中的意义[J].地理学报,1985,40(1):20-27.

Qiu H J, Regmi A D, Cui P, et al. Slope aspect effects of loess slides and its spatial differentiation in different geomorphologic types[J].Arabian Journal of Geosciences,2017,10(15):e344.

汤国安,李发源,刘学军.数字高程模型教程[M].3版.北京:科学出版社,2016.

吴森,李虎杰,陈国辉,等.基于贡献率权重法的区域滑坡影响因子敏感性分析[J].中国地质灾害与防治学报,2016,27(1):26-31.

杨寒月,张光辉,张宝军.黄土丘陵沟壑区沟坡典型植物群落生长特征[J].水土保持研究,2019,26(2):62-68.

赵兴阳,徐向舟,蒋云钟,等.暴雨条件下植被对黄土沟坡重力侵蚀的影响[J].水土保持学报,2020,34(1):58-63.

袁湘秦,赵法锁,陈新建,等.陕西省绥德县地质灾害易发性区划[J].灾害学,2017,32(1):117-120,125.

余璐,徐向舟,张茂省,等.黄土高原重力侵蚀对地貌因素的敏感性分析[J].水土保持学报,2019,33(4):119-125.

浏览量

871

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

基于无人机倾斜摄影技术的黄土丘陵区典型小流域淤地坝特征信息提取与分析

长江上游定量遥感监测模型地形因子应用研究

基于GIS和随机森林算法的宁东土壤饱和导水率分布与预测

黔中地区不同干扰对马尾松林土壤性质的影响

基于无人机航摄的坡形对浅沟发育的影响