草业学报 ›› 2024, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (3): 24-33.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb2023137
赵娅如1,2(), 曹雲翔1, 杨成参1,2, 史锋厚1(), 付红祥3, 初磊1
收稿日期:
2023-04-26
修回日期:
2023-06-05
出版日期:
2024-03-20
发布日期:
2023-12-27
通讯作者:
史锋厚
作者简介:
E-mail: 280918109@qq.com基金资助:
Ya-ru ZHAO1,2(), Yun-xiang CAO1, Cheng-can YANG1,2, Feng-hou SHI1(), Hong-xiang FU3, Lei CHU1
Received:
2023-04-26
Revised:
2023-06-05
Online:
2024-03-20
Published:
2023-12-27
Contact:
Feng-hou SHI
摘要:
高速公路边坡防护常采用生态护坡方式,尤其以植被结合覆盖方式防护效果较好。为掌握高速公路边坡的水文效应,通过建立边坡试验模型,设置不同处理组合开展人工降雨,探讨不同覆盖物、不同生长期植被、不同降雨强度对边坡模型水文效应的影响,以便确定最佳的边坡植被防护体系参数。结果表明:在降雨强度为120 mm·h-1时,覆盖椰丝草毯、秸秆纤维毯、草帘的边坡比裸土边坡的坡面径流量分别减少23.25%、15.66%、17.94%,而坡体水分渗透量分别增加了65.19%、48.10%、27.89%。在降雨强度为120 mm·h-1时,不同生长期的植被边坡防护能力表现出明显的差异,其中4月生植被边坡模型的坡面径流量最小,坡体水分渗透量最大,抗雨水冲刷能力最强。降雨强度为60 mm·h-1时,植被边坡并未产生坡面径流,植被发挥了很好的保护效果;随着降雨强度逐渐增大,裸土边坡和植被边坡的坡面产生径流时间和坡体水分渗出时间逐渐缩短,坡面径流量和泥沙占比均呈逐渐增大的变化趋势。综合而言,粉砂性高速公路边坡采用狗牙根(12 g·m-2)、紫穗槐(14 g·m-2)、胡枝子(10 g·m-2)种子混播后,覆盖椰丝草毯(300 g·m-2),在正常管理养护条件下,待植物生长3个月后,坡面抗雨水冲刷能力显著增强,在降雨强度不超过120 mm·h-1时,植被结合覆盖方式均表现出较好的防护效果。植物和覆盖物两者相互作用可以减弱雨水对于边坡的冲击强度,消减坡面径流量,同时植物根系有利于雨水渗透坡体,保持水土,涵养水源。
赵娅如, 曹雲翔, 杨成参, 史锋厚, 付红祥, 初磊. 人工降雨条件下高速公路植被边坡模型水文效应测试[J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(3): 24-33.
Ya-ru ZHAO, Yun-xiang CAO, Cheng-can YANG, Feng-hou SHI, Hong-xiang FU, Lei CHU. Hydrological effects of highway vegetation slope model under artificial rain conditions[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2024, 33(3): 24-33.
指标 Index | 不同材料覆盖边坡 The slope covered with different materials | 不同生长时间植被边坡 The vegetation slope with different growing time | 不同降雨强度下边坡 The slope under different rainfall intensities | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
自由度 Degree of freedom | F值 F value | 自由度 Degree of freedom | F值 F value | 自由度 Degree of freedom | F值 F value | |
坡面产流起始时间Runoff onset time | 3 | 90.909** | 3 | 205.393** | 4 | 98.362** |
坡面径流量Slope runoff | 3 | 1005.459** | 3 | 11416.809** | 4 | 36887.711** |
坡面泥沙收集量Sediment collection | 3 | 1425.075** | 3 | 6521.690** | 4 | 1425.075** |
坡面雨水收集量Rainwater collection | 3 | 3318.008** | 3 | 1276.718** | 4 | 1867.413** |
坡体水分渗出时间Seepage time | 3 | 15.419** | 3 | 15.419** | 5 | 543.000** |
坡体水分渗透量Seepage amount | 3 | 787.637** | 3 | 787.637** | 5 | 10078.980** |
表1 人工降雨条件下边坡水文测试指标方差分析
Table 1 ANOVA of hydrological testing indicators of slope under artificial rainfall
指标 Index | 不同材料覆盖边坡 The slope covered with different materials | 不同生长时间植被边坡 The vegetation slope with different growing time | 不同降雨强度下边坡 The slope under different rainfall intensities | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
自由度 Degree of freedom | F值 F value | 自由度 Degree of freedom | F值 F value | 自由度 Degree of freedom | F值 F value | |
坡面产流起始时间Runoff onset time | 3 | 90.909** | 3 | 205.393** | 4 | 98.362** |
坡面径流量Slope runoff | 3 | 1005.459** | 3 | 11416.809** | 4 | 36887.711** |
坡面泥沙收集量Sediment collection | 3 | 1425.075** | 3 | 6521.690** | 4 | 1425.075** |
坡面雨水收集量Rainwater collection | 3 | 3318.008** | 3 | 1276.718** | 4 | 1867.413** |
坡体水分渗出时间Seepage time | 3 | 15.419** | 3 | 15.419** | 5 | 543.000** |
坡体水分渗透量Seepage amount | 3 | 787.637** | 3 | 787.637** | 5 | 10078.980** |
处理 Treatment | 产流起始时间 Runoff onset time (min) | 坡面径流量 Slope runoff (g·m-2) | 泥沙收集量 Sediment collection (g·m-2) | 雨水收集量 Rainwater collection (g·m-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|
无覆盖Uncovered (CK) | 2±0.10Dd | 61631±227.15Aa | 4421±38.16Aa | 57210±72.67Aa |
椰丝草毯Coconut grass blanket | 3±0.26Cc | 47302±145.71Dd | 1713±53.11Dd | 45589±89.11Dd |
秸秆纤维毯Straw fiber blanket | 4±0.26Bb | 51983±128.79Bb | 1893±54.99Cc | 50090±70.15Bb |
草帘Straw curtain | 5±0.26Aa | 50580±602.72Cc | 2699±74.64Bb | 47081±281.17Cc |
表2 不同材料覆盖边坡坡面产流起始时间、坡面径流、泥沙及雨水收集量
Table 2 Runoff onset time, slope runoff, sediment and rainwater collection of slope surface covered with different materials
处理 Treatment | 产流起始时间 Runoff onset time (min) | 坡面径流量 Slope runoff (g·m-2) | 泥沙收集量 Sediment collection (g·m-2) | 雨水收集量 Rainwater collection (g·m-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|
无覆盖Uncovered (CK) | 2±0.10Dd | 61631±227.15Aa | 4421±38.16Aa | 57210±72.67Aa |
椰丝草毯Coconut grass blanket | 3±0.26Cc | 47302±145.71Dd | 1713±53.11Dd | 45589±89.11Dd |
秸秆纤维毯Straw fiber blanket | 4±0.26Bb | 51983±128.79Bb | 1893±54.99Cc | 50090±70.15Bb |
草帘Straw curtain | 5±0.26Aa | 50580±602.72Cc | 2699±74.64Bb | 47081±281.17Cc |
处理 Treatment | 渗出时间 Seepage time (min) | 渗透量 Seepage amount (mL·m-2) |
---|---|---|
无覆盖Uncovered (CK) | 13±1.00Aa | 17670±150.36Dd |
椰丝草毯Coconut grass blanket | 11±0.35Aa | 29190±516.98Aa |
秸秆纤维毯Straw fiber blanket | 9±0.79Bb | 26170±86.81Bb |
草帘Straw curtain | 12±0.72Aa | 22599±276.73Cc |
表3 不同材料覆盖边坡坡体水分渗出时间和渗透量
Table 3 Seepage time and seepage amount of the slope covered with different materials
处理 Treatment | 渗出时间 Seepage time (min) | 渗透量 Seepage amount (mL·m-2) |
---|---|---|
无覆盖Uncovered (CK) | 13±1.00Aa | 17670±150.36Dd |
椰丝草毯Coconut grass blanket | 11±0.35Aa | 29190±516.98Aa |
秸秆纤维毯Straw fiber blanket | 9±0.79Bb | 26170±86.81Bb |
草帘Straw curtain | 12±0.72Aa | 22599±276.73Cc |
处理 Treatment | 产流起始时间Runoff onset time (min) | 坡面径流量 Slope runoff (g·m-2) | 泥沙收集量 Sediment collection (g·m-2) | 雨水收集量 Rainwater collection (g·m-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|
裸土边坡The bare soil slope (CK) | 2±0.15Dd | 61420±708.08Aa | 4420±86.65Aa | 57000±2090.08Aa |
2月生植被边坡Vegetation slope with two months growth period | 9±0.70Cc | 24318±259.01Bb | 648±22.87Bb | 23670±70.93Bb |
3月生植被边坡Vegetation slope with three months growth period | 13±0.87Bb | 12702±130.97Cc | 108±4.36Cc | 12594±70.74Cc |
4月生植被边坡Vegetation slope with four months growth period | 15±0.82Aa | 10180±52.04Dd | 48±3.61Cc | 10132±32.42Dc |
表4 不同生长时间植被边坡产流起始时间、坡面径流、泥沙及雨水收集量
Table 4 Runoff onset time, slope runoff, sediment and rainwater collection of vegetation slope with different growing time
处理 Treatment | 产流起始时间Runoff onset time (min) | 坡面径流量 Slope runoff (g·m-2) | 泥沙收集量 Sediment collection (g·m-2) | 雨水收集量 Rainwater collection (g·m-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|
裸土边坡The bare soil slope (CK) | 2±0.15Dd | 61420±708.08Aa | 4420±86.65Aa | 57000±2090.08Aa |
2月生植被边坡Vegetation slope with two months growth period | 9±0.70Cc | 24318±259.01Bb | 648±22.87Bb | 23670±70.93Bb |
3月生植被边坡Vegetation slope with three months growth period | 13±0.87Bb | 12702±130.97Cc | 108±4.36Cc | 12594±70.74Cc |
4月生植被边坡Vegetation slope with four months growth period | 15±0.82Aa | 10180±52.04Dd | 48±3.61Cc | 10132±32.42Dc |
处理Treatment | 渗出时间Seepage time (min) | 渗透量Seepage amount (mL·m-2) |
---|---|---|
裸土边坡The bare soil slope (CK) | 13±0.35Aa | 17670±145.01Dd |
2月生植被边坡Vegetation slope with two months growth period | 7±0.46Bb | 46789±251.79Cc |
3月生植被边坡Vegetation slope with three months growth period | 5±0.92Cc | 53500±88.50Bb |
4月生植被边坡Vegetation slope with four months growth period | 4±0.36Cc | 55634±205.65Aa |
表5 不同生长时间植被坡体水分渗出时间和渗透量
Table 5 Seepage time and seepage amount of vegetation slope with different growing time
处理Treatment | 渗出时间Seepage time (min) | 渗透量Seepage amount (mL·m-2) |
---|---|---|
裸土边坡The bare soil slope (CK) | 13±0.35Aa | 17670±145.01Dd |
2月生植被边坡Vegetation slope with two months growth period | 7±0.46Bb | 46789±251.79Cc |
3月生植被边坡Vegetation slope with three months growth period | 5±0.92Cc | 53500±88.50Bb |
4月生植被边坡Vegetation slope with four months growth period | 4±0.36Cc | 55634±205.65Aa |
图3 不同降雨强度下坡面产流率和产沙率的变化裸土边坡a:60 mm·h-1 90 min裸土边坡;裸土边坡b:90 mm·h-1 60 min裸土边坡;裸土边坡c:120 mm·h-1 45 min裸土边坡;4月生植被边坡a:90 mm·h-1 60 min 4月生植被边坡;4月生植被边坡b:120 mm·h-1 45 min 4月生植被边坡。Bare soil slope a: 60 mm·h-1 90 min bare soil slope; Bare soil slope b: 90 mm·h-1 60 min bare soil slope; Bare soil slope c: 120 mm·h-1 45 min bare soil slope; Four mouths vegetation slope a: 90 mm·h-1 60 min four mouths vegetation slope; Four mouths vegetation slope b: 120 mm·h-1 45 min four mouths vegetation slope.
Fig.3 Changes of runoff yield and sediment yield under different rainfall intensity
坡面类型 Slope type | 降雨强度 Rainfall intensity (mm·h-1) | 降雨时间 Rainfall time (min) | 产流起始时间 Runoff onset time (min) | 坡面径流量 Slope runoff (g·m-2) | 泥沙收集量 Sediment collection (g·m-2) | 雨水收集量 Rainwater collection (g·m-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
裸土边坡 The bare soil slope | 60 | 90 | 6±0.75Cc | 41993±109.49Cc | 893±32.05Cc | 41100±959.16Cc |
90 | 60 | 4±0.26Cc | 51193±158.19Bb | 1873±32.51Bb | 49320±1496.15Bb | |
120 | 45 | 2±0.26Cd | 61420±133.00Aa | 4420±97.39Aa | 57000±506.04Aa | |
植被边坡 The vegetation slope | 60 | 90 | \\ | 0 | 0 | 0 |
90 | 60 | 25±2.65Aa | 7221±56.71Ee | 21±1.00Dd | 7200±79.50Ee | |
120 | 45 | 15±2.52Bb | 10180±430.88Dd | 48±2.65Dd | 10132±888.40Dd |
表6 不同降雨强度下边坡坡面径流量对比
Table 6 Comparison of slope runoff under different rainfall intensities
坡面类型 Slope type | 降雨强度 Rainfall intensity (mm·h-1) | 降雨时间 Rainfall time (min) | 产流起始时间 Runoff onset time (min) | 坡面径流量 Slope runoff (g·m-2) | 泥沙收集量 Sediment collection (g·m-2) | 雨水收集量 Rainwater collection (g·m-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
裸土边坡 The bare soil slope | 60 | 90 | 6±0.75Cc | 41993±109.49Cc | 893±32.05Cc | 41100±959.16Cc |
90 | 60 | 4±0.26Cc | 51193±158.19Bb | 1873±32.51Bb | 49320±1496.15Bb | |
120 | 45 | 2±0.26Cd | 61420±133.00Aa | 4420±97.39Aa | 57000±506.04Aa | |
植被边坡 The vegetation slope | 60 | 90 | \\ | 0 | 0 | 0 |
90 | 60 | 25±2.65Aa | 7221±56.71Ee | 21±1.00Dd | 7200±79.50Ee | |
120 | 45 | 15±2.52Bb | 10180±430.88Dd | 48±2.65Dd | 10132±888.40Dd |
边坡类型 Slope type | 降雨强度 Rainfall intensity (mm·h-1) | 降雨时间 Rainfall time (min) | 渗出时间 Seepage time (min) | 渗透量 Seepage amount (mL·m-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|
裸土边坡The bare soil slope | 60 | 90 | 22±0.60Aa | 29030±91.80Cc |
90 | 60 | 17±0.60Bb | 22250±435.11Dd | |
120 | 45 | 13±0.61Cc | 17460±221.62Ee | |
植被边坡The vegetation slope | 60 | 90 | 8±0.44Dd | 61100±529.49Aa |
90 | 60 | 6±0.44Ee | 55680±320.20Bb | |
120 | 45 | 4±0.36Ff | 55634±203.17Bb |
表7 不同降雨强度下坡体水分渗出时间和渗透量
Table 7 Seepage time and seepage amount of slope under different rainfall intensities
边坡类型 Slope type | 降雨强度 Rainfall intensity (mm·h-1) | 降雨时间 Rainfall time (min) | 渗出时间 Seepage time (min) | 渗透量 Seepage amount (mL·m-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|
裸土边坡The bare soil slope | 60 | 90 | 22±0.60Aa | 29030±91.80Cc |
90 | 60 | 17±0.60Bb | 22250±435.11Dd | |
120 | 45 | 13±0.61Cc | 17460±221.62Ee | |
植被边坡The vegetation slope | 60 | 90 | 8±0.44Dd | 61100±529.49Aa |
90 | 60 | 6±0.44Ee | 55680±320.20Bb | |
120 | 45 | 4±0.36Ff | 55634±203.17Bb |
1 | Lu H. Study on the loess highway slope erosion mechanism and experimental adaptability of grass-mud protection. Xi’an: Chang’an University, 2014. |
卢浩. 黄土公路边坡冲刷机理及草泥防护适应性试验研究. 西安: 长安大学, 2014. | |
2 | Wu R X. Research on landslides mechanism induced by rainfall. Changsha: Central South University, 2013. |
吴仁铣. 降雨诱发的滑坡作用机制研究. 长沙: 中南大学, 2013. | |
3 | Wang J H. Research the principle of water-soil interaction in soil-slope and analyze and predict its stability in condition of rain infiltration. Changsha: Central South University, 2006. |
王继华. 降雨入渗条件下土坡水土作用机理及其稳定性分析与预测预报研究. 长沙: 中南大学, 2006. | |
4 | Li A G, Yue Z Q, Tan G H, et al. Soil moisture and suction measurement and its effect on slope stability. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2003, 25(3): 278-282. |
李爱国, 岳中琦, 谭国焕, 等. 土体含水率和吸力量测及其对边坡稳定性的影响. 岩土工程学报, 2003, 25(3): 278-282. | |
5 | Song P R. The erosion damage characteristics and numerical simulation of loess slope. Changchun: Jilin University, 2013. |
宋朋燃. 黄土边坡冲刷破坏特征及数值模拟. 长春: 吉林大学, 2013. | |
6 | Shen Z Z, Yao W Y, Li M, et al. Study on soil erosion sediment under different underlying horizon. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2010, 17(1): 6-9. |
申震洲, 姚文艺, 李勉, 等. 不同下垫面对坡面侵蚀特征的影响. 水土保持研究, 2010, 17(1): 6-9. | |
7 | Shi D M. Study on eroded environment and its soil and water loss characteristics during expressway construction. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2006, 20(2): 5-9. |
史东梅. 高速公路建设中侵蚀环境及水土流失特征的研究. 水土保持学报, 2006, 20(2): 5-9. | |
8 | Sun K B, Luo Y, Yuan C, et al. Design and parameter calibration of artificially simulated rainfall device for full-scale mode: Test of slope. Safety and Environmental Engineering, 2019, 26(2): 69-75. |
孙狂飙, 罗易, 袁超, 等. 边坡足尺模型试验人工模拟降雨装置的设计与参数率定. 安全与环境工程, 2019, 26(2): 69-75. | |
9 | Su W N, Tian Y M, Gao B, et al. Design and calibration of an artificial rainfall simulator. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 2015, 35(6): 120-123. |
苏溦娜, 田一梅, 高波, 等. 人工模拟降雨装置的设计及其参数率定. 水土保持通报, 2015, 35(6): 120-123. | |
10 | Wang J, Hu S W, Zhou Y. Application of artificial simulation of rainfall devices to soil and water conservation. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2005, 12(4): 188-190. |
王洁, 胡少伟, 周跃. 人工模拟降雨装置在水土保持方面的应用. 水土保持研究, 2005, 12(4): 188-190. | |
11 | Alvarez-mozos J, Abad E, Gimenez R, et al. Evaluation of erosion control geotextiles on steep slopes. Part1: Effects on runoff and soil loss. Catena, 2014, 118(1): 168-178. |
12 | Shao Q, Gu W, Dai Q Y, et al. Effectiveness of geotextile mulches for slope restoration in semi-arid northern China. Catena, 2014, 116(5): 1-9. |
13 | Won C H, Choi Y H, Shin M H, et al. Effects of rice straw mats on runoff and sediment discharge in a laboratory rainfall simulation. Geoderma, 2012, 189(6): 164-169. |
14 | Zhang J S, Zhang M H, Li Q H, et al. Effects of eco-mat mulch on soil temperature and water content in desert. Journal of Desert Research, 2008(2): 280-283. |
张建生, 张梅花, 李庆会, 等. 生态垫覆盖对沙漠土壤水分和温度的影响. 中国沙漠, 2008(2): 280-283. | |
15 | Li H J, Kong Y P, Zhang Y, et al. Effect of geotextile on road slope microhabitat. Journal of Highway and Transportation Research and Development, 2016, 33(6): 146-151. |
李宏钧, 孔亚平, 张岩, 等. 植物纤维毯对道路边坡微生境的影响. 公路交通科技, 2016, 33(6): 146-151. | |
16 | Chen Z P. Application of plant fiber blanket in high speed side slope protection. Henan Science and Technology, 2017(6): 132-134. |
陈振平. 植物纤维毯在高速边坡防护中的应用. 河南科技, 2017(6): 132-134. | |
17 | Rickson R J. Controlling sediment at source: An evaluation of erosion control geotextiles. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 2006, 31(5): 550-560. |
18 | Sutherland R A, Ziegler A D. Effectiveness of coir-based rolled erosion control systems in reducing sediment transport from hillslopes. Applied Geography, 2007, 27(3/4): 150-164. |
19 | Liu H Y, Liu L, Li X J, et al. Comprehensive benefit evaluation on the protection technique of plant fiber blanket on the road side slope. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2019, 33(1): 345-352. |
刘宏远, 刘亮, 李秀军, 等. 植物纤维毯道路边坡防护技术综合效益评价. 水土保持学报, 2019, 33(1): 345-352. | |
20 | Yue H B, Yang J Y, Yang Y, et al. Evaluation on water retention benefit of side slope vegetation carpet. Journal of Sichuan Agricultural University, 2014, 32(1): 23-27. |
岳恒陛, 杨建英, 杨旸, 等. 边坡绿化中植被毯技术保水效益评价. 四川农业大学学报, 2014, 32(1): 23-27. | |
21 | Feng J C, Wang J H. Influence of the roots on the slope stability. Journal of East China Jiaotong University, 2003, 20(5): 42-45. |
封金财, 王建华. 植物根的存在对边坡稳定性的作用. 华东交通大学学报, 2003, 20(5): 42-45. | |
22 | Zhang P, Wang S S, Ma Y M, et al. Effects of plant fiber blankets of different herbaceous plant growth stages on runoff and sediment yield in the loess hilly and gully region. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020, 34(5): 49-55. |
张平, 王树森, 马迎梅, 等. 黄土丘陵沟壑区不同草本植物生长期植物纤维毯对沟道边坡产流产沙的影响. 水土保持学报, 2020, 34(5): 49-55. | |
23 | Wang D M, Chen S L. Analysis of the factors influencing soil infiltration. Water Sciences and Engineering Technology, 2016(1): 64-66. |
王冬梅, 陈胜利. 影响土壤入渗的因素分析. 水科学与工程技术, 2016(1): 64-66. | |
24 | Yin J. Influence of rainfall on stability of soil slope. Nanjing: Nanjing Technology University, 2008. |
尹俊. 降雨对土质边坡稳定性的影响. 南京: 南京工业大学, 2008. | |
25 | Wang X L. Model test study of the hydrological effect of slope vegetation under the action of artificial rainfall. Haikou: Hainan University, 2015. |
王晓亮. 人工降雨作用下边坡植被水文效应模型试验研究. 海口: 海南大学, 2015. | |
26 | Ji X L, Yang P. The exploration of the slope displacement with vegetation protection under different rainfall intensity. Journal of Forestry Engineering, 2020, 5(5): 152-156. |
嵇晓雷, 杨平. 不同降雨强度下植被护坡对边坡位移的影响. 林业工程学报, 2020, 5(5): 152-156. | |
27 | Wang B Y, Wang R H, Jing S S, et al. Effects of rainfall and slope gradient on runoff and sediment yield of subgrade slope. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Sciences Edition), 2019, 43(2): 114-120. |
王保一, 王荣华, 荆莎莎, 等. 降雨和坡度对路基边坡产流产沙的影响. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2019, 43(2): 114-120. |
[1] | 史锋厚, 倪岳, 杨成参, 赵娅如, 付红祥. 粉砂性高速公路路基边坡植物护坡方案对比分析[J]. 草业学报, 2023, 32(8): 71-81. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||