| Literature DB >> 25435866 |
Qizhou Hu1, Ningbo Gao1, Bing Zhang2.
Abstract
In order to rationally evaluate the high speed railway operation safety level, the environmental safety evaluation index system of high speed railway should be well established by means of analyzing the impact mechanism of severe weather such as raining, thundering, lightning, earthquake, winding, and snowing. In addition to that, the attribute recognition will be identified to determine the similarity between samples and their corresponding attribute classes on the multidimensional space, which is on the basis of the Mahalanobis distance measurement function in terms of Mahalanobis distance with the characteristics of noncorrelation and nondimensionless influence. On top of the assumption, the high speed railway of China environment safety situation will be well elaborated by the suggested methods. The results from the detailed analysis show that the evaluation is basically matched up with the actual situation and could lay a scientific foundation for the high speed railway operation safety.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25435866 PMCID: PMC4241704 DOI: 10.1155/2014/470758
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci
High speed railway mechanism analysis of environmental impact factors.
| Environmental factor | Mechanism |
|---|---|
| Rainfall | (i) Raining is the foremost factor that is easily causing line fault. Additionally, the current flow will emerge between the pantograph and overhead line systems of the high speed railway when it comes to a heavy rainy day and the train power supply will also be consequently influenced. |
|
| |
| Cross wind | (i) The mechanism of the influence caused by horizontal wind on the high speed railway is that it can produce the yawing force which will allow the lateral migration. Moreover, the produced lift force will lead to the train derailment through the pneumatic action with the high speed train, which will undeniably increase the risk of train being derailed. |
|
| |
| Lightning | (i) Lightning can disrupt the power supply of the high speed railway train traction which will result in the sudden stop of the high speed rail train through breaking down the high speed railway along the circuit devices. |
|
| |
| Earthquake | (i) Earthquake wave can be divided into two kinds: the P wave (primary wave, pressure wave) and the S wave (secondary wave, shear wave). S wave can destroy the building structure and cause the landslides, orbital shift, and train wheel derailment which will influence the safe driving of high speed railway. |
|
| |
| Temperature | (i) High temperature can lead to a big temperature difference between the internal and external, the increase of air conditioning power, and the aggravation of the train power supply load. Besides, high temperature can cause the short circuit because of the softened line. |
|
| |
| Snowfall | (i) A lot of snow will cover the track and the ice on the track will increase the degree of danger of the train operation. |
Figure 1High speed railway environmental impact evaluation indexes system.
Japanese Shinkansen winds threshold.
| Wind scale | Wind speed (m/s) | The impact with no wind-break wall | The impact with wind-break wall |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8.0-9.0 | 20–25 | The train speed under 160 km/h | No speed limit |
| 9.0–10.4 | 25–30 | The train speed under 70 km/h | The train speed under 160 km/h |
| 10.4–12.5 | 30–35 | Off-stream | The train speed under 70 km/h |
| Above 12.5 | Above 35 | Off-stream | Off-stream |
Earthquake magnitude threshold of high speed railway (D takes 2.55).
| Rank | Very serious | Serious | General | Slight | No effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Train lateral acceleration ( | 240 Gal | 180 Gal | 120 Gal | 60 Gal | 0 Gal |
| Earthquake magnitude (EAT) | >5.2 | 4.8 | 4.4 | 3.9 | <3.9 |
The annual rainfall threshold of high speed railway.
| Rank | Very serious | Serious | General | Slight | No effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Annual rainfall | >2970 mm | 1980 mm | 900 mm | 600 mm | <600 mm |
High speed railway environment impact assessment index discrimination safety threshold.
| Environment | Evaluation Index | Particularly serious | Serious | Medium | Slight | No effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Cross wind |
| >30 | 25–30 | 15–25 | 5–15 | 0–5 |
|
| >3 | 2-3 | 1-2 | 0.5–1.0 | 0–0.5 | |
| Snowfall |
| >30 | 22–30 | 17–22 | 9–17 | 0–9 |
| Earthquake |
| >5.2 | 4.8–5.2 | 4.4–4.8 | 3.9–4.4 | 0–3.9 |
|
| >1.0 | 0.6–1.0 | 0.3–0.6 | 0.1–0.3 | 0-0.1 | |
| Lightning |
| >55 | 45–55 | 30–45 | 15–30 | 0–15 |
| Rainfall |
| >2970 | 1980–2970 | 900–1980 | 600–900 | 0–600 |
| Temperature |
| >64 | 48–64 | 35–48 | 25–35 | 10–25 |
|
| <−20 | −10–−20 | −10–0 | 0–5 | 5–10 |
X 1: average disaster annual wind speed.
X 2 : the annual incidence of disasters monsoon.
X 3: annual maximum snow depth.
X 4: the average magnitude level.
X 5: average annual rate of earthquake occurrence.
X 6: annual lightning density.
X 7: annual maximum rainfall.
X 8: average annual maximum temperature.
X 9: average annual minimum temperature.
Chinese regional environment situation in recent years from 2002 to 2012.
| Region | Index | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Beijing | 0 | 0 | 22.5 | 0 | 0 | 13.61 | 498.96 | 26.86 | −2.75 |
| Tianjin | 41.67 | 0.11 | 19.7 | 0 | 0 | 8.6 | 504.6 | 26.84 | −3.71 |
| Hebei | 47.92 | 0.22 | 20 | 7.8 | 0.03 | 29.97 | 544.97 | 27.48 | −1.77 |
| Shanxi | 0 | 0 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 27.41 | 443.46 | 24.48 | −5.11 |
| Inner Mongolia | 0 | 0 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 0.6 | 373.29 | 23.56 | −10.87 |
| Liaoning | 41.67 | 0.11 | 25 | 7.3 | 0.02 | 8.75 | 701.63 | 24.3 | −12.01 |
| Jilin | 26.39 | 0.11 | 27 | 0 | 0 | 9.25 | 598.41 | 23.38 | −14.6 |
| Heilongjiang | 0 | 0 | 34 | 0 | 0 | 15.44 | 498.9 | 23.24 | −16.9 |
| Shanghai | 32.99 | 0.89 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 17.176 | 1092.41 | 29.39 | 4.75 |
| Jiangsu | 35.14 | 1.11 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 40.25 | 1164.72 | 28.81 | 2.95 |
| Zhejiang | 39.22 | 2.78 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 76 | 1276.82 | 29.95 | 4.84 |
| Anhui | 36.87 | 1.22 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 35.75 | 1057.21 | 28.74 | 2.76 |
| Fujian | 39.56 | 3.22 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 35.3 | 1355.53 | 29.81 | 11.3 |
| Jiangxi | 38.8 | 1.78 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 35 | 1500.14 | 30.13 | 5.53 |
| Shandong | 33.8 | 0.33 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 32.5 | 820.57 | 26.98 | −1.21 |
| Henan | 42.13 | 0.33 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 30.67 | 724.81 | 27.29 | 1.4 |
| Hubei | 40.67 | 0.78 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 26.72 | 1210.48 | 29.83 | 4.38 |
| Hunan | 35.52 | 0.78 | 16.4 | 0 | 0 | 29 | 1276.44 | 29.96 | 8.39 |
| Guangdong | 33.93 | 4.11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 48.25 | 1805.49 | 29.78 | 13.16 |
| Guangxi | 34.92 | 2.33 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 26.25 | 1189.73 | 28.3 | 14.49 |
| Hainan | 31.74 | 2.22 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 38.75 | 1780.62 | 29.06 | 14.07 |
| Chongqing | 0 | 0 | 3.7 | 0 | 0 | 23.58 | 1065.61 | 29.53 | 6.89 |
| Sichuan | 0 | 0 | 4.2 | 7.44 | 0.1 | 57.256 | 843.16 | 25.96 | 5.98 |
| Guizhou | 43.06 | 0.11 | 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 31.75 | 989.78 | 23.19 | 3.52 |
| Yunnan | 35.19 | 0.33 | 0 | 7.33 | 0.1 | 27.21 | 878.28 | 21 | 9.62 |
| Tibet | 0 | 0 | 52 | 0 | 0 | 0.29 | 453.12 | 17.31 | 0.62 |
| Shanxi | 15 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 15.46 | 611.11 | 27.61 | 0.36 |
| Gansu | 12.4 | 2.22 | 18 | 6.6 | 0.02 | 0.36 | 271.74 | 22.46 | −5.06 |
| Qinghai | 32 | 3.56 | 15 | 6.9 | 0.02 | 0.42 | 442.9 | 17.48 | −7.75 |
| Ningxia | 4.72 | 1.89 | 17.9 | 0 | 0 | 4.77 | 175.34 | 24.31 | −7.38 |
| Xinjiang | 46 | 4.67 | 46 | 7.1 | 0.05 | 0.25 | 309.61 | 24.19 | −12.9 |
Chinese regional environment impacts attribute recognition value of high speed railway.
| Region | Value | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Particularly serious | Serious | Medium | Slight | No effect | Classification | |
| Xinjiang | 0.301 | 0.402 | 0.117 | 0.003 | 0.177 | Serious |
| Sichuan | 0.376 | 0.246 | 0.196 | 0.120 | 0.062 | |
| Jilin | 0.303 | 0.363 | 0.146 | 0.082 | 0.106 | |
| Heilongjiang | 0.269 | 0.342 | 0.215 | 0.140 | 0.034 | |
|
| ||||||
| Hebei | 0.169 | 0.196 | 0.237 | 0.231 | 0.168 | Medium |
| Liaoning | 0.201 | 0.203 | 0.218 | 0.198 | 0.180 | |
| Jiangsu | 0.177 | 0.209 | 0.228 | 0.211 | 0.174 | |
| Zhejiang | 0.180 | 0.202 | 0.225 | 0.205 | 0.188 | |
| Anhui | 0.166 | 0.202 | 0.234 | 0.221 | 0.177 | |
| Jiangxi | 0.196 | 0.222 | 0.206 | 0.199 | 0.178 | |
| Hubei | 0.179 | 0.210 | 0.221 | 0.216 | 0.175 | |
| Hunan | 0.175 | 0.205 | 0.221 | 0.222 | 0.176 | |
| Guangdong | 0.195 | 0.200 | 0.212 | 0.198 | 0.196 | |
| Fujian | 0.194 | 0.211 | 0.195 | 0.200 | 0.200 | |
|
| ||||||
| Beijing | 0.163 | 0.193 | 0.226 | 0.239 | 0.179 | Slight |
| Tianjin | 0.158 | 0.188 | 0.232 | 0.234 | 0.187 | |
| Shanxi | 0.160 | 0.190 | 0.227 | 0.228 | 0.195 | |
| Inner Mongolia | 0.178 | 0.200 | 0.202 | 0.212 | 0.208 | |
| Shanghai | 0.173 | 0.203 | 0.215 | 0.224 | 0.185 | |
| Hainan | 0.168 | 0.198 | 0.222 | 0.224 | 0.189 | |
| Shandong | 0.162 | 0.196 | 0.234 | 0.222 | 0.186 | |
| Henan | 0.150 | 0.184 | 0.247 | 0.237 | 0.182 | |
| Guangxi | 0.151 | 0.181 | 0.222 | 0.248 | 0.199 | |
| Chongqing | 0.180 | 0.201 | 0.208 | 0.223 | 0.187 | |
| Guizhou | 0.162 | 0.187 | 0.202 | 0.206 | 0.244 | |
| Yunnan | 0.153 | 0.177 | 0.201 | 0.229 | 0.239 | |
| Tibet | 0.178 | 0.192 | 0.202 | 0.213 | 0.215 | |
| Shaanxi | 0.155 | 0.187 | 0.235 | 0.245 | 0.178 | |
| Gansu | 0.165 | 0.191 | 0.215 | 0.237 | 0.192 | |
| Qinghai | 0.177 | 0.194 | 0.194 | 0.203 | 0.231 | |
| Ningxia | 0.155 | 0.183 | 0.224 | 0.237 | 0.200 | |
Figure 2Chinese environment impacts of high speed railway distribution.
The attribute recognition of high speed railway classification score.
| Classification | No effect | Slight | Medium | Serious | Particularly serious |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 90 | 80 | 70 | 60 | 50 |
The environment impacts of high speed railway lines distribution.
| Lines | Serious environmental impact | Middle environment impact | Light environmental impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jinhu | — | Nanjing, Jinan | Beijing, Tianjin, and Shanghai |
| Hebang | — | Hefei, Bengbu | — |
| Jinshi | — | Shijiazhuang | Beijing |
| Wuguang | — | Wuhan, Changsha | Guangzhou, Foshan |
| Guangshengang | — | — | Guangzhou, Shenzhen |
| Yongtaiwen | — | — | Ningbo, Taizhou, and Wenzhou |
| Wenfu | — | Wenzhou, Fuzhou | — |
| Fuxia | — | Fuzhou, Xiamen, and Quanzhou | — |
| Zhenxi | — | Zhengzhou, Xi 'an | |
| Xibao | — | — | Xi 'an, Baoji |
| Huhang | — | Jiaxing, Hangzhou | Shanghai |
| Hewu | — | Nanjing, Hefei, and Wuhan | — |
| Hanyi | — | Hankou, Zhijiang, and Yinchuan | — |
| Hening | — | Hefei, Nanjing | — |
| Jiaoji | — | — | Jinan, Qingdao |
| Shitai | — | — | Shijiazhuang, Taiyuan |
| Huning | — | Nanjing, Suzhou | Shanghai |
| Yiwan | Wangzhou, Ensi | — | Yichang |
| Yuli | — | Chongqing, Fuling | Liangwu |
| Suiyu | Suining, Shizuishan | — | — |
| Dacheng | Dazhou, Suining, and Chengdu | — | — |