本文關(guān)鍵詞： 公路邊坡 土壤含水量 時(shí)空變化特征 保水效果　出處：《沈陽(yáng)農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：高等級(jí)公路是我國(guó)一項(xiàng)重要的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施,對(duì)公路建設(shè)過(guò)程中形成的邊坡進(jìn)行防護(hù)對(duì)公路邊坡穩(wěn)定及行車安全具有重要作用。作為邊坡防護(hù)的主體,綠化植被的正常生長(zhǎng)離不開水分,而土壤水分狀況不僅是影響植物生存和穩(wěn)定最敏感的限制因子,對(duì)植被恢復(fù)和生態(tài)環(huán)境重建也是具有決定性作用的因子,即探討土壤水分在公路邊坡的變動(dòng)特性,對(duì)邊坡順利地進(jìn)行防護(hù)具有重要的指導(dǎo)意義。以沈棋路沿線的草皮防護(hù)、掛網(wǎng)噴播、六角空心磚防護(hù)和菱形網(wǎng)格植草四種典型邊坡防護(hù)形式為研究對(duì)象,使用頻域反射儀(FDR)法取得表土層的水分?jǐn)?shù)值,以便于分析探討不同公路邊坡防護(hù)形式下土壤水分在時(shí)間和空間上的變化特性,以確定公路邊坡不同護(hù)坡形式的保水效果。研究的結(jié)論如下:(1)4月各護(hù)坡形式土壤水分含量均表現(xiàn)為從坡上至坡下逐漸增大的變化規(guī)律;7月的第三、第四天及9月的第二至第四天,六角防護(hù)坡面坡中含水量高于坡下和坡上部,其余觀測(cè)時(shí)間的坡面水分分布規(guī)律與4月份一致;(2)4月的第一、第二天,各護(hù)坡形式土壤含水量均值大小為草皮防護(hù)掛網(wǎng)噴播六角空心磚防護(hù)菱形網(wǎng)格植草,第三、第四天為草皮防護(hù)六角空心磚防護(hù)掛網(wǎng)噴播菱形網(wǎng)格植草;7月的第一天為草皮防護(hù)菱形網(wǎng)格植草掛網(wǎng)噴播六角空心磚防護(hù),第二至第四天與9月的第三、第四天均表現(xiàn)為草皮防護(hù)六角空心磚防護(hù)菱形網(wǎng)格植草掛網(wǎng)噴播;9月的第一、第二天為草皮防護(hù)掛網(wǎng)噴播菱形網(wǎng)格植草六角空心磚防護(hù);(3)4月含水量在各坡面表現(xiàn)為草皮防護(hù)六角空心磚防護(hù)掛網(wǎng)噴播菱形網(wǎng)格植草;7月為草皮防護(hù)六角空心磚防護(hù)菱形網(wǎng)格植草掛網(wǎng)噴播;9月為草皮防護(hù)菱形網(wǎng)格植草六角空心磚防護(hù)掛網(wǎng)噴播;草皮防護(hù)和菱形防護(hù)的坡面含水量在各月均表現(xiàn)為9月4月7月;掛網(wǎng)植草為4月9月7月;六角防護(hù)為4月7月9月;(4)不同護(hù)坡形式下坡面水分減少量間均存在顯著差異(Sig.0.05);同一種護(hù)坡形式下同一坡位的水分變異程度呈現(xiàn)隨時(shí)間變化逐漸增大的規(guī)律;在四種護(hù)坡形式中除六角防護(hù)表現(xiàn)為坡上坡下坡中外,其余三種護(hù)坡形式均表現(xiàn)為從坡上至坡下逐漸趨于減弱,即坡上坡中坡下;(5)4月不同護(hù)坡形式含水率變化量平均值大小排序?yàn)榱庑尉W(wǎng)格植草(12.5%)掛網(wǎng)噴播(10.6%)草皮防護(hù)(9.2%)六角空心磚防護(hù)(8.5%);7月為掛網(wǎng)噴播(25.8%)菱形網(wǎng)格植草(22.3%)草皮防護(hù)(18.6%)六角空心磚防護(hù)(17.8%);9月為掛網(wǎng)噴播(23.7%)菱形網(wǎng)格植草(20.0%)草皮防護(hù)(15.8%)六角空心磚防護(hù)(14.6%),綜上,7月份邊坡坡面植被耗水量最大,保水能力大小依次為六角空心磚防護(hù)草皮防護(hù)菱形網(wǎng)格植草掛網(wǎng)噴播,保水效果以六角空心磚配合紫穗槐灌木和小火炬草本植被的護(hù)坡形式為最好。
[Abstract]:High-grade highway is an important infrastructure in China. It plays an important role in slope stability and driving safety. The normal growth of greening vegetation is inseparable from water, and soil moisture is not only the most sensitive limiting factor affecting plant survival and stability, but also a decisive factor for vegetation restoration and ecological environment reconstruction. That is to say, it is of great significance to discuss the changing characteristics of soil moisture in highway slope, which is of great significance for the smooth protection of the slope. Four typical slope protection forms, hexagonal hollow brick protection and rhombohedral grid grass planting, were studied. The surface soil moisture values were obtained by frequency-domain reflectometer (FDR) method. In order to analyze and discuss the variation characteristics of soil moisture in time and space under different forms of highway slope protection, In order to determine the water retention effect of different slope protection forms on highway slope, the conclusion of the study is as follows: in April, the soil moisture content of each slope protection form increased gradually from the top of the slope to the bottom of the slope, and the third in July, On 4th days and the second to 4th days of September, the water content in the hexagonal slope was higher than that in the lower slope and the upper part of the slope. The distribution of water on the slope of the remaining observation time was the same as that of April) the first and the second day of April. The average value of soil water content in each slope protection form is turf protection, hanging net, spray seeding hexagonal hollow brick to protect rhombus grid grass, third, 4th days for turf protection, hexagonal hollow brick protective net for spray seeding rhomboid mesh planting grass; first day for turf protection rhombic grid grass hanging net spraying hexagonal hollow brick protection, second to 4th days and third on September, 4th days for turf protection hexagonal hollow brick protection rhombus grid grass hanging net spray; September first, On April, the water content on each slope was shown as turf protection, hexagonal hollow brick protection, spray seeding with rhomboid mesh, and turf protection with hexagonal hollow brick on July, and with hexagonal hollow brick on July. In September, it was sprayed for turf protection rhombic grid with hexagonal hollow brick. The slope water content of turf protection and rhombohedral protection was July on September, July on April on September, July on July on hanging net grass, and July on July on turf protection and rhombohedral protection, respectively. Hexagon protection was taken on April July. (4) there were significant differences in water reduction of slope surface under different slope protection forms (Sig. 0.05), and the variation degree of water in the same slope position under the same slope protection showed the law of increasing with time. In the four slope protection forms, except hexagonal protection, the other three slope protection forms are gradually weakening from the top to the bottom of the slope, and the other three forms of slope protection are gradually weakening from the top of the slope to the bottom of the slope. On April, the average value of water content change in different slope protection forms was arranged as rhombus grid grass planting 12.5) hanging net spraying sowing 10.6) turf protection was 9.2g) hexagonal hollow brick protection was 8.5g / h; on July it was sprayed 25.8m for hanging net; and 22.3mm for rhombus mesh planting grass). (18. 6) Hexagon hollow brick protection is 17.8m; on September, it was sprayed on a net for 23.7m) rhombic grid grass planting 20.0) turf protection was 15.810%) Hexagon hollow brick protection was 14.60.The slope slope vegetation on the slope in July consumed the largest amount of water. The order of water retention capacity was hexagonal hollow brick protection turf protection rhombus grid grass planting net spray seeding. The best water conservation effect was in the form of slope protection of hexagonal hollow brick combined with Amorpha fruticosa shrub and small flare herbaceous vegetation.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：沈陽(yáng)農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：U417.12;S152.7

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 溫福來(lái),李宏;護(hù)坡在北部引嫩工程中的作用分析[J];黑龍江水利科技;2003年03期

2 丁學(xué)智 ,孫宏明 ,徐本達(dá);簡(jiǎn)單易行的防風(fēng)浪護(hù)坡形式[J];水利天地;2004年05期

3 裘濤;黃建超;黃邵軍;;山區(qū)性河道中生態(tài)型護(hù)坡的運(yùn)用[J];中國(guó)科技信息;2007年10期

4 陳慧清;;護(hù)坡型式選擇應(yīng)用實(shí)例分析[J];黑龍江水利科技;2012年03期

5 吳玲玲;羅海東;易明珠;;關(guān)于河岸護(hù)坡形式應(yīng)用的探討[J];江蘇水利;2012年10期

6 徐文全,王水田;凹岸護(hù)坡的沖刷[J];水運(yùn)工程;1980年08期

7 燕同勝;平原水庫(kù)上游護(hù)坡的總結(jié)與探討[J];山東水利科技;1996年02期

8 趙敏;劉茂祥;孫鳳宇;;青石嶺水庫(kù)上游護(hù)坡破壞成因分析[J];水利科技與經(jīng)濟(jì);2009年02期

9 程建華;李小紅;張艷霞;黃菁菁;;分淮入沂堤防護(hù)坡設(shè)計(jì)方案研究[J];治淮;2009年10期

10 李樂(lè);孫珂;吳庚;;生物膜袋護(hù)坡在梅溪河示范段的應(yīng)用[J];河南水利與南水北調(diào);2011年13期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前1條

1 周先林;王紹力;沈汝君;錢積亮;張巨英;;環(huán)保型綠化混凝土在土壩護(hù)坡上的應(yīng)用[A];地方水利技術(shù)的應(yīng)用與實(shí)踐學(xué)術(shù)交流論文集[C];2004年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 山東農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)資源與環(huán)境學(xué)院 張志國(guó);裸露山體生態(tài)恢復(fù)途徑（一）[N];中國(guó)花卉報(bào);2004年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 徐利鑫;拱形預(yù)制塊骨架護(hù)坡結(jié)構(gòu)試驗(yàn)研究及數(shù)值分析[D];湖南科技大學(xué);2015年

2 陳志強(qiáng);公路邊坡不同生態(tài)護(hù)坡形式土壤水分特征分析[D];沈陽(yáng)農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué);2017年

3 馮健;濱水護(hù)坡的生態(tài)轉(zhuǎn)型與景觀營(yíng)造形式研究[D];山東建筑大學(xué);2014年

，

本文編號(hào)：1497050