[1]刘希林,陈宜娟.泥石流点密度和面密度对区域泥石流危险度的影响——对比研究[J].自然灾害学报,2011,20(02):036-43.
 LIU Xi-lin,CHEN Yi-juan.Influence of debris flow spot and area densities on regional hazardousness of debris flow:a comparative study[J].,2011,20(02):036-43.
点击复制

泥石流点密度和面密度对区域泥石流危险度的影响——对比研究
分享到:

《自然灾害学报》[ISSN:/CN:23-1324/X]

卷:
20
期数:
2011年02期
页码:
036-43
栏目:
出版日期:
2011-04-09

文章信息/Info

Title:
Influence of debris flow spot and area densities on regional hazardousness of debris flow:a comparative study
作者:
刘希林12 陈宜娟3
1. 中山大学地理科学与规划学院, 广东 广州 510275;
2. 中山大学自然灾害研究中心, 广东 广州 510275;
3. 成都市温江区国土资源局, 四川 成都 611130
Author(s):
LIU Xi-lin12 CHEN Yi-juan3
1. School of Geographical Sciences and Planning, Sun Yat-sen University Guangzhou 510275, China;
2. Natural Disaster Research Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China;
3. Land Resource Bureau of Wenjiang, Chengdu 611130, China
关键词:
泥石流分布密度区域危险度
Keywords:
debris flowdistribution densityregional hazardousness
分类号:
P642.23;TP391
摘要:
泥石流分布密度是区域泥石流危险度评价的主要指标。泥石流分布密度分为点密度和面密度,前者是指每103km内泥石流沟的数量;后者是指每103km内泥石流沟的流域面积。以川西山区60个县市区为研究样本,分别以泥石流点密度和面密度作为区域泥石流危险度的主要评价指标,结合7个相同的区域泥石流危险度的次要评价指标,对研究区以县市区为基本单元的区域泥石流危险度进行了定量评价。结果表明,各县市区面积加权平均后的泥石流危险度分别为0.51(面密度)和0.52(点密度),差别甚微,整体上均属于泥石流中度危险区。两者的平均绝对差值0.04,远小于0.2这一危险度等级差值,平均相对差值为6.49%,小于10%这一允许的均方差范围。由此可知,用泥石流面密度来评价区域泥石流危险度,并非优于点密度;相反地,由于泥石流点密度具有获取资料相对容易、计算比较简便、工作量较小等优点,因而具有更为便利的推广应用价值。
Abstract:
Debris flow density is the primary factor to assess regional hazardousness of debris flow.Debris flow density includes spot density and area density.The former is the number of debris flows per 103km2 land;the later is the drainage area of debris flows per 103km2 land.Taking 60 counties in west Sichuan for the study samples,using the spot and area densities as primary indices incorporated with the other 7 secondary indices,this paper assesses the regional hazardousness of debris flow with the basic unit of county.The results indicate that the hazardousness is 0.51 and 0.52 separately for area density and spot density of debris flows which are differential each other very slightly and are the same class of moderate hazardousness of debris flow.The mean of absolute difference of the both is 0.04,which is far smaller than 0.2 of the class difference.The average relative difference of the both is 6.49%,which falls in the neglected mean square difference.Thus the assessment using the area density is not better than that using the spot density.Adversely,because of the relative easy for data acquirement,simplicity for calculation,and laborsaving work,the spot density assessment for regional hazardousness of debris flow is more valuable to application.

参考文献/References:

[1] 刘希林,唐川,张松林.泥石流相对分布密度的确定方法[J].水土保持学报,1992,6(1):57-62.
[2] Xilin Liu,Junzhong Lei. A method for assessing regional debris flow risk:an application in Zhaotong of Yunnan province(SW China)[J].Geomorphology,2003,52(3-4):181-191.
[3] 唐邦兴,柳素清.四川省阿坝藏族羌族自治州泥石流及其防治研究[M].成都:成都科技大学出版社,1993,1-179.
[4] 谭万沛,王成华,姚令侃,等.暴雨泥石流滑坡的区域预测与预报以攀西地区为例[M].成都:四川科学技术出版社,1994,1-279.
[5] 中国科学院成都山地灾害与环境研究所.四川与重庆泥石流分布及危险度区划图[M].成都:成都地图出版社,1997.
[6] 刘希林,唐川.泥石流危险性评价[M].北京:科学出版社,1995.
[7] 刘希林.泥石流危险区划的探讨[J].灾害学,1989,4(4):3-9.
[8] 刘希林.区域泥石流风险评价研究[J].自然灾害学报,2000,9(1):54-61.
[9] 刘希林.区域泥石流危险度评价研究进展[J].中国地质灾害与防治学报,2002,13(4):1-9.

相似文献/References:

[1]聂娟,范一大,邓磊,等.山洪灾害雷达遥感灾情评估技术研究与应用[J].自然灾害学报,2010,19(03):105.
 NIE Juan,FAN Yi-da,DENG Lei,et al.Research and application of torrential flood loss assessment based on radar remote sensing technology[J].,2010,19(02):105.
[2]杨成林,陈宁生,李战鲁.汶川地震次生泥石流形成模式与机理[J].自然灾害学报,2011,20(03):031.
 YANG Cheng-lin,CHEN Ning-sheng,LI Zhan-lu.Formation mode and mechanism fordebris flow induced by Wenchuan earthquake[J].,2011,20(02):031.
[3]杨月巧,胡俊锋,郗蒙浩.基于灰色关联法的舟曲泥石流灾害影响因素分析[J].自然灾害学报,2011,20(03):139.
 YANG Yue-qiao,HU Jun-feng,XI Meng-hao.Analysis of influence factors of debris flow disaster in Zhouqu based on grey relevance method[J].,2011,20(02):139.
[4]李倩,黄勇.新疆天山公路泥石流风险评价研究[J].自然灾害学报,2011,20(04):154.
 LI Qian,HUANG Yong.Risk evaluation of debris flow for Tianshan Highway in Xinjiang[J].,2011,20(02):154.
[5]梁专明.新化县水车镇泥石流灾害研究[J].自然灾害学报,2011,20(05):032.
 LIANG Zhuan-ming.Study on debris flow disaster in Shuiche Town, Xinhua County[J].,2011,20(02):032.
[6]李朝安,胡卸文,王良玮.山区铁路沿线泥石流泥位自动监测预警系统[J].自然灾害学报,2011,20(05):074.
 LI Chao-an,HU Xie-wen,WANG Liang-wei.Automatic monitoring and early warning system of mud-position of debris flow along railway line in mountainous area[J].,2011,20(02):074.
[7]陈春光,姚令侃,杨庆华,等.基于堰流理论的泥石流堵河模型研究[J].自然灾害学报,2012,21(06):131.
 CHEN Chunguang,YAO Lingkan,YANG Qinghua,et al.Study of river-blocking due to debris flow based on weir flow theory[J].,2012,21(02):131.
[8]耿慧辉,贾景超.都江堰龙池镇三神公泥石流灾害特征[J].自然灾害学报,2012,21(06):136.
 GENG Huihui,JIA Jingchao.Features of Sanshengong debris flow hazard in Longchi Town of Dujiangyan City[J].,2012,21(02):136.
[9]冯杭建,唐小明,周爱国.浙江省泥石流与降雨历时关系研究及应用检验[J].自然灾害学报,2013,22(01):159.
 FENG Hangjian,TANG Xiaoming,ZHOU Aiguo.Study on relationship between rainfall duration and occurrence of debris flow in Zhejiang Province and its application examination[J].,2013,22(02):159.
[10]刘兴荣,董耀刚,王生新,等.成县黄渚镇泥石流形成机理及特征[J].自然灾害学报,2013,22(01):169.
 LIU Xingrong,DONG Yaogang,WANG Shengxin,et al.Formation mechanism and characteristics of debris flows in Huangzhu Town,Chengxian County[J].,2013,22(02):169.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
收稿日期:2009-7-23;改回日期:2010-5-21。
基金项目:国家自然科学基金资助项目(41071186)
作者简介:刘希林(1963- ),男,教授,博士生导师,主要从事地貌灾害过程及评估和预测的科研和教学工作.E-mail:liuxilin@mail.sysu.edu.cn
更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01