本文選題：VFM + 地下綜合管廊　； 參考：《吉林大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著我國經(jīng)濟發(fā)展,各項基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施逐步完善,地下綜合管廊也登上了國家基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施建設(shè)的舞臺。CH城是一座文明古城,各管線年代久遠,腐蝕嚴(yán)重,地下綜合管廊將各種市政管線歸納在同一條地下管溝中,不僅可以美化社會環(huán)境,解決“空中蜘蛛網(wǎng)”和“馬路拉鏈”的問題,也可以降低各管線單位管道腐蝕更新成本,充分利用地下空間資源,對各管線統(tǒng)一管理,智能監(jiān)控,降低了后期運營維護成本,增加了社會效益。近年來,國家積極推行PPP模式,住建部強烈推薦PPP模式,但是我國PPP實踐證明,PPP模式并不是在任何情況下都是最優(yōu),每種建設(shè)模式也并非完全最優(yōu),因此,本文以集成化管理的思維對CH城地下綜合管廊建設(shè)模式選擇進行研究,希望對CH城地下綜合管廊后期工程提供指導(dǎo),為我國其他類似項目提供參考。本文從因素識別、建設(shè)模式介紹和建設(shè)模式評價選擇方面展開研究。首先,對影響地下綜合管廊建設(shè)模式選擇的因素進行分析,從國家層面、地方政府層面和項目層面識別出12個因素,分別為法律和制度環(huán)境因素、宏觀經(jīng)濟因素、政府管理因素、政府財政因素、政府技術(shù)因素、政府信用因素、項目質(zhì)量因素、項目成本效益因素、項目進度因素、項目風(fēng)險因素、項目規(guī)模因素、項目環(huán)境因素;然后,根據(jù)社會資本的參與程度,結(jié)合文獻統(tǒng)計,將地下綜合管廊備選建設(shè)模式分為傳統(tǒng)建設(shè)模式和PPP建設(shè)模式,分別介紹了傳統(tǒng)建設(shè)模式中的DBB模式、DB模式、CM模式、PM模式、PMC模式及DM模式和PPP建設(shè)模式中的BOT模式、BOO模式、BT模式、TOT模式及PFI模式;其后,根據(jù)“適用性排除法”原則,通過頭腦風(fēng)暴法,進行物有所值定性比較,結(jié)合CH城實際情況,對備選建設(shè)模式進行初步比較分析,最終,篩選出PMC模式和BOT模式;然后,根據(jù)分析過程提煉出15個評價指標(biāo),運用德爾菲法針對每種篩選出的建設(shè)模式指標(biāo)權(quán)重賦值,借鑒模糊思想進行“掃盲”,運用結(jié)構(gòu)熵權(quán)法對權(quán)重結(jié)果進行修正,再結(jié)合專家對指標(biāo)符合程度進行打分,運用綜合評分法,計算得出篩選出的建設(shè)模式定性評價得分;最后,運用公共部門比較值法對篩選出的建設(shè)模式進行VFM定量評價,假設(shè)產(chǎn)出相同,計算PMC模式下的公共部門比較值和BOT模式下全壽命周期成本現(xiàn)值,借助灰色關(guān)聯(lián)性理想解法對VFM定性評價和定量評價結(jié)果進行標(biāo)準(zhǔn)統(tǒng)一,從而將二者的評價結(jié)果相結(jié)合,用灰色關(guān)聯(lián)相對貼近度確定了BOT模式為更適合CH城地下綜合管廊的建設(shè)模式,并對VFM定量評價過程中的估計參數(shù)進行了敏感性分析,結(jié)果表明該項目中,BOT模式下的全壽命周期成本現(xiàn)值比PMC模式下的公共部門比較值現(xiàn)值降低率對折現(xiàn)率和風(fēng)險計提率更為敏感。本文的研究視角為政府委托投資單位,雖然CH城新城和舊城對地下綜合管廊需求均比較大,但是由于舊城牽連眾多,因此,CH城暫未對舊城地下綜合管廊進行規(guī)劃,因此,本文研究針對CH城規(guī)劃范圍內(nèi)的新城179.7km地下綜合管廊進行建設(shè)模式選擇,而CH城地下綜合管廊建設(shè)以整體規(guī)劃,按地區(qū)、年度依次進行建設(shè),且新城地下綜合管廊段的土質(zhì)、水質(zhì)等基本相同,政府委托單位也相同,定量計算以HY大路段7.12km綜合管廊情況進行說明,在一定程度上可以代表目前CH城地下綜合管廊建設(shè)。
[Abstract]:With the development of China's economy and the gradual improvement of the infrastructure, the underground comprehensive corridor is also on the stage of the national infrastructure construction,.CH city is a civilized city. Each pipeline is long and corroded. The underground comprehensive pipe corridor induces various municipal pipelines in the same underground canal, which can not only beautify the social environment and solve the "empty". The problem of "Chinese spider web" and "road zipper" can also reduce the cost of corrosion and update of pipeline units, make full use of underground space resources, unified management of various pipelines and intelligent monitoring, reduce the cost of post operation and maintenance, and increase social benefits. In recent years, the PPP model is actively carried out by the Chinese family, and the Ministry of construction strongly recommends the PPP model. It is China's PPP practice that the PPP model is not the best in any case, and each construction mode is not completely optimal. Therefore, this paper studies the selection of the construction model of the underground comprehensive tube Gallery in CH city with the thought of integrated management, and hopes to provide guidance for the later project of the CH city underground comprehensive pipe corridor and provide the other similar projects in our country. For reference. This article from the factor identification, the construction model introduction and the construction model evaluation selection. First, the factors affecting the selection of the construction model of the underground comprehensive corridor are analyzed, and 12 factors are identified from the national level, the local government level and the project level, which are divided into legal and institutional environment factors, macroeconomic factors, and politics. Government management factors, government financial factors, government technical factors, government credit factors, project quality factors, project cost and benefit factors, project progress factors, project risk factors, project scale factors, project environmental factors, and then, according to the participation of social capital, combined with literature statistics, the alternative construction model of underground comprehensive corridor is divided into two types. The traditional construction mode and the PPP construction model respectively introduce the DBB mode, the DB mode, the CM mode, the PM mode, the PMC mode and the DM mode and the BOT mode in the PPP construction mode, the BOO mode, the BT mode, the TOT mode and the pattern. Then, the value qualitative analysis is carried out by the brainstorming method according to the principle of "applicability exclusion". Compared with the actual situation of CH City, a preliminary comparison and analysis of the alternative construction model was carried out, and finally, the PMC model and BOT model were selected. Then, according to the analysis process, 15 evaluation indexes were extracted and the weights assigned by Delphy Fa for each type of construction model index were used, and the fuzzy thought was used for "literacy", and the structure entropy weight method was used. The result of the weight is revised, and then combined with the experts to score the index of the index, the comprehensive scoring method is used to calculate the qualitative evaluation score of the selected construction model. Finally, the VFM quantitative evaluation is carried out by the public sector comparison value method for the selected construction model, the false output is the same, and the public sector comparison under the PMC model is calculated. The value of the total life cycle cost under the value of BOT model and the grey relational ideal solution are used to standardize the qualitative evaluation and quantitative evaluation results of VFM, thus combining the evaluation results of the two, and using the relative close degree of the gray correlation to determine the BOT model as a more suitable construction model for the underground comprehensive Gallery of CH City, and to evaluate the quantitative evaluation of VFM. The sensitivity analysis of the estimated parameters in the process shows that in the project, the present value of the total life cycle cost under the BOT model is more sensitive to the discount rate and the risk assessment rate than that of the public sector under the PMC model. The research angle of this paper is the government entrusting investment units, although the city of CH city and the old city are under the ground The demand of comprehensive corridor is relatively large, but because the old city is a lot of people, CH city is not planning for the old city underground comprehensive pipe corridor for the time being. Therefore, this paper studies the selection of the construction model of the new town 179.7km underground comprehensive pipe corridor in the scope of the CH city planning, and the construction of the CH city underground comprehensive pipe corridor is planned as a whole by the region and in the year. In the construction, the soil quality and water quality of the metro tunnel section are basically the same, and the government entrusted units are the same. The quantitative calculation is illustrated by the 7.12km comprehensive pipe gallery of HY road section, which can represent the construction of the present underground comprehensive tube Gallery in CH city to some extent.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：F299.24

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 楊賀龍;;關(guān)于地下綜合管廊項目PPP模式的思考[J];智能建筑與智慧城市;2017年01期

2 孫萍;薛濤;;城市地下綜合管廊PPP建設(shè)模式分析[J];金陵科技學(xué)院學(xué)報;2016年04期

3 譚忠盛;陳雪瑩;王秀英;黃明利;;城市地下綜合管廊建設(shè)管理模式及關(guān)鍵技術(shù)[J];隧道建設(shè);2016年10期

4 周蘭萍;張留雨;葉華軍;;地下綜合管廊PPP項目的風(fēng)險管理[J];建筑;2016年20期

5 韓懿;;關(guān)于地下綜合管廊PPP項目招標(biāo)文件中風(fēng)險揭示、分配與控制措施條款的建議[J];招標(biāo)與投標(biāo);2016年10期

6 朱珊;孟肖旭;王海平;;基于VFM評價的地下綜合管廊投融資模式選擇選擇研究[J];工程經(jīng)濟;2016年09期

7 王建波;趙佳;覃英豪;;城市地下綜合管廊投融資體制[J];土木工程與管理學(xué)報;2016年04期

8 劉慧慧;孫劍;李飛飛;;城市地下綜合管廊應(yīng)用PPP模式的VFM評價[J];土木工程與管理學(xué)報;2016年04期

9 朱宗乾;賈義伍;;智慧城市建設(shè)模式選擇研究[J];未來與發(fā)展;2016年06期

10 祝呂靜;魏森;;基于TOPSIS的中國水務(wù)項目投資模式選擇研究[J];項目管理技術(shù);2015年04期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 禹濤;政府投資效率研究[D];東北財經(jīng)大學(xué);2015年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 張曉然;城市軌道交通PPP項目的物有所值定量評價研究[D];北京交通大學(xué);2016年

2 李鑫鑫;我國建設(shè)工程項目交易模式選擇影響因素分析[D];大連理工大學(xué);2015年

3 陳允謀;貴州省城市準(zhǔn)經(jīng)營性公共項目建設(shè)PPP模式應(yīng)用研究[D];貴州大學(xué);2015年

4 蔣國華;子城公司市政工程項目管理模式評價與風(fēng)險研究[D];南華大學(xué);2013年

5 黃淑娟;南寧市五象新區(qū)市政管廊項目建設(shè)風(fēng)險管理研究[D];廣西大學(xué);2013年

6 于笑飛;青島高新區(qū)綜合管廊維護運營管理模式研究[D];中國海洋大學(xué);2013年

7 陳中琴;公共工程建設(shè)模式選擇理論與方法研究[D];武漢理工大學(xué);2013年

8 張秋玲;公共管廊PPP投融資模式研究[D];北京建筑工程學(xué)院;2012年

9 段勇華;城市地下空間開發(fā)利用研究[D];南京農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué);2011年

10 李佳嶸;基于我國國情的PSC評價體系研究[D];清華大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號：2014801