SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of the Rock Burst Intensity of a Cloud Model Based on the CRITIC Method and the Order Relation Analysis Method

  • Published:
Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Rock burst has always been a major problem in deep underground engineering with high stress, and rock burst strength evaluation has become an important research topic. To effectively predict the rock burst hazard in underground rock mass engineering, a cloud model (CM) rock burst intensity evaluation method based on the CRITIC method and order relation analysis method (G1) was proposed in this paper. First, a rock’s uniaxial compressive strength σc, tangential stress σθ, uniaxial tensile strength σt, ratio of uniaxial compressive strength to tensile strength σc/σt (brittleness coefficient), ratio of tangential stress to uniaxial compressive strength σθ/σc (stress coefficient), elastic deformation energy index Wet, and depth of cover H were selected as evaluation indices of rock burst intensity. Ninety-five groups of rock burst measured data at home and abroad were selected, and the objective weight and subjective weight of each index were calculated by using the CRITIC method and G1 method, respectively. The comprehensive weight was determined according to the combined weighting method of game theory, and the sensitivity of each evaluation index was analyzed. By utilizing a forward cloud generator, the membership degrees of different rock burst grades were calculated, and then the rock burst intensity grades of the samples were evaluated and compared with the evaluation results of the CRITIC-CM method and G1-CM method and the actual grades. Finally, the rock burst classification ability of the model was analyzed. To better verify the accuracy and reliability of this model, the rock burst case of the W39 line in the Chengchao Iron Mine was analyzed by using this model. The research results show that the rock burst evaluation results based on CRITIC-G1-CM are basically consistent with the actual rock burst grade, and the rock burst intensity grade evaluation model has good practicability and reliability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Farhadian H (2021) A new empirical chart for rockburst analysis in tunnelling: Tunnel rockburst classification (TRC). Int J Min Sci Technol 31(4):603–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.2021.03.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Blake W, Hedley DGF (2003). Rockbursts: case studies from North American hard-rock mines. New York: Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration:121

  3. Liu Z, Shao J, Xu W, Meng Y (2013) Prediction of rock burst classification using the technique of cloud models with attribution weight. Nat Hazards 68(2):549–568. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-013-0635-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Adoko AC, Gokceoglu C, Wu L, Zuo QJ (2013) Knowledge-based and data-driven fuzzy modeling for rockburst prediction. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 61:86–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2013.02.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Li DY, Liu CY, Gan WY (2009) A new cognitive model: cloud model. Int J Intell Syst 24(3):357–375. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.20340

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Russenes BF (1974) Analysis of rock spalling for tunnels in steep valleysides. Trondheim: Norwegian Institute of Technology

  7. Barton N, Lien R, Lunde J (1975) Engineering classification of rock masses for the design of tunnel support. Int J Rock Mech Mining Sci Geomech Abstracts 12(5–6):77. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(75)91319-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Turchaninov IA, Markov GA, Lovchikov AV (1981) Conditions of changing of extra-hard rock into weak rock under the influence of tectonic stresses of massifs. Tokyo: Proceedings of International Symposium Weak Rock:555–559.

  9. Hoek E, Brown ET (1980) Underground excavation in rock. Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, London

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kidybinski AQ (1981) Bursting liability indices of coal. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 18(4):295–304

  11. Chen W, Lv S, Guo X, Qiao C (2009) Study on confining pressure relief test and rock burst criterion based on energy principle. Chin J Rock Mech Eng 08:1530–1540

    Google Scholar 

  12. Lu J (1986) Study on rock burst mechanism of hydraulic diversion tunnel. Proceedings of the First National Symposium on Numerical Calculation and Model Test of Rock Mechanics, Chengdu: Southwest Jiaotong University Press:210–214.

  13. Xu M, Du Z, Yao G, Liu Z (2008) Prediction of rock burst in deep mining of Chengchao Iron Mine. Chin J Rock Mech Eng S1:2921–2928

    Google Scholar 

  14. Zhou X, Zhang G, Song Y, Hu S, Liu M, Li J (2019) Evaluation of rock burst intensity based on annular grey target decision-making model with variable weight. Arab J Geosci 12(2):43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-018-4193-z

  15. Li N, Feng X, Jimenez R (2017) Predicting rock burst hazard with incomplete data using Bayesian networks. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 61:61–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2016.09.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Xue Y, Li Z, Li S, Qiu D, Tao Y, Wang L, Yang WM, Zhang K (2017) Prediction of rock burst in underground caverns based on rough set and extensible comprehensive evaluation. Bull Eng Geol Env. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-017-1117-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Shukla R, Khandelwal M, Kankar PK (2021) Prediction and assessment of rock burst using various meta-heuristic approaches. Mining, Metall Explor 38(3):1375–1381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-021-00415-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Li Z, Xue Y, Li S, Qiu D, Zhang L, Zhao Y, Zhou B (2020) Rock burst risk assessment in deep-buried underground caverns: a novel analysis method. Arab J Geosci 13(11):388. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-020-05328-4

  19. Lin Y, Zhou K, Li J (2018) Application of cloud model in rock burst prediction and performance comparison with three machine learning algorithms. IEEE Access 6:30958–30968. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2018.2839754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Zhou K, Lin Y, Deng H, Li J, Liu C (2016) Prediction of rock burst classification using cloud model with entropy weight. Trans Nonferrous Metals Soc China 26(7):1995–2002. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1003-6326(16)64313-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Wang J, Liu P, Ma L, He M (2021) A rockburst proneness evaluation method based on multidimensional cloud model improved by control variable method and rockburst database. Lithosphere 4:5354402. https://doi.org/10.2113/2022/5354402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Li D, Meng H, Shi X (1995) Membership clouds and membership cloud generators. J Comput Res Dev 06:15–20

    Google Scholar 

  23. Zhu M, Hahn A, Wen YQ (2018) Identification-based controller design using cloud model for course-kee** of ships in waves. Eng Appl Artif Intell 75:22–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2018.07.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Zang W, Ren L, Zhang W, Liu X (2018) A cloud model based DNA genetic algorithm for numerical optimization problems. Futur Gener Comput Syst 81:465–477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2017.07.036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Gao H, **e G, Liu H, Zhang X, Li D (2017) Lateral control of autonomous vehicles based on learning driver behavior via cloud model. J China Univ Posts Telecommun 24(2):10–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1005-8885(17)60194-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Khedim F, Labraoui N, Ari AAA (2018) A cognitive chronometry strategy associated with a revised cloud model to deal with the dishonest recommendations attacks in wireless sensor networks. J Netw Comput Appl. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnca.2018.09.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Li J, Wang MW, Xu P, Xu PC (2014) Classification of stability of surrounding rock using cloud model. Chin J Geotech Eng 36(1):83–87

    Google Scholar 

  28. Gong Y (2012) Comprehensive assessment on ecological risk of Hexi corridor urbanization based on normal cloud model and entropy weight. J Arid Land Resour Environ 26(5):169–174

    Google Scholar 

  29. Peng T, Deng H (2020) Comprehensive evaluation on water resource carrying capacity in karst areas using cloud model with combination weighting method: a case study of Guiyang, southwest China. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 27:37057–37073

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Yao J, Wang G, Xue B, Wang P, Hao F, **e G, Peng Y (2019) Assessment of lake eutrophication using a novel multidimensional similarity cloud model. J Environ Manag 248:109259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Peng T, Deng H, Lin Y, ** Z (2021) Assessment on water resources carrying capacity in karst areas by using an innovative DPESBRM concept model and cloud model. Sci Total Environ 767:144353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Tian YG, Du YH, Qin DH, Liao XL (2011) Flood risk evaluation methods based on data field and cloud model. China Safety Science 21(8):158–163. https://doi.org/10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2011.08.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Afraei S, Shahriar K, Madani SH (2017) Statistical analysis of rock-burst events in underground mines and excavations to present reasonable data-driven predictors. J Stat Comput Simul 87(17):3336–3376. https://doi.org/10.1080/00949655.2017.1367000

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Mutke G, Dubiński J, Lurka A (2015) New criteria to assess seismic and rock burst hazard in coal mines / Nowe Kryteria Dla Oceny Zagrożenia Sejsmicznego I Tąpaniami W Kopalniach Węgla Kamiennego. Arch Min Sci 60(3):743–760. https://doi.org/10.1515/amsc-2015-0049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Wang Y, Li Q (1998) Comprehensive evaluation method of fuzzy mathematics for rock burst prediction. J Rock Mech Eng 17(5):495–501

    Google Scholar 

  36. Wang J, Huang M, Guo J (2021) Rock burst evaluation using the critic algorithm-based cloud model. Front Phys 8:593701. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2020.593701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Wang Q (2008) Aggregate analysis of group decision making based on G1 method. Management Innovation & Industrial Engineering for the Rise of Central China

    Google Scholar 

  38. Yi L, Zhao J, Yu W, Long G, Sun H, Li W (2020) Health status evaluation of catenary based on normal fuzzy matter-element and game theory. J Electr Eng Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42835-020-00481-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Wang MW, Xu P, Xu PC (2014) Classification of stability of surrounding rock using cloud model. Chin J Geotech Eng 36(1):83–87. https://doi.org/10.11779/CJGE201401006

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  40. Tian R (2020) Research and application of prediction model of rockburst intensity level based on machine learning.(Doctoral dissertation, Inner Mongolia University of Science and Technology). https://kns.cnki.net/KCMS/detail/detail.aspx?dbname=CDFDLAST2021&filename=1021543708.nh

  41. Zhang CQ, Zhou H, Feng XT (2011) An index for estimating the stability of brittle surrounding rock mass: FAI and its engineering application. Rock Mech Rock Eng 44(4):401–414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-011-0150-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Zhou J, Li X, Shi X (2012) Long-term prediction model of rockburst in underground openings using heuristic algorithms and support vector machines. Saf Sci 50(4):629–644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2011.08.065

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 52204156) and the Sichuan Natural Science Foundation (Grant No. 2022NSFSC147).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Environment and Resource, Southwest University of Science and Technology, Mianyang, 621010, China

    Qianjun Zhang, Chuanju Liu, Sha Guo, Wentong Wang & Haoming Luo

  2. Shock and Vibration of Engineering Materials and Structures Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Southwest University of Science and Technology, Mianyang, 621010, China

    Chuanju Liu

  3. Changchun Gold Research Institute Co., Ltd, Changchun, 130012, China

    Yongheng Jiang

Authors
  1. Qianjun Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chuanju Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sha Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wentong Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Haoming Luo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yongheng Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chuanju Liu.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest. No conflict of interest exists in the submission of this manuscript, and the manuscript has been approved by all authors for publication. The authors declare that except for the preprint published in the research square, it has been published elsewhere. All the authors listed have approved the manuscript that is enclosed.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, Q., Liu, C., Guo, S. et al. Evaluation of the Rock Burst Intensity of a Cloud Model Based on the CRITIC Method and the Order Relation Analysis Method. Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration 40, 1849–1863 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-023-00838-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-023-00838-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation