天然災害後橋梁特別檢測及修復優選排序模式之研究

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	張榮安 Mustapha Jallow
論文名稱：	天然災害後橋梁特別檢測及修復優選排序模式之研究 A Model for Prioritizing Bridges for Damage Inspection and Rehabilitation after Natural Disasters
指導教授：	姚乃嘉教授 Yau Nie-Jia, Ph.D. 廖先格博士 Liao Hsien-Ke, Ph.D.
口試委員:
學位類別：	碩士 Master
系所名稱：	工學院 - 土木系營建管理碩士班 Master's Program in Construction Management, Department of Civil Engineering
論文出版年：	2018
畢業學年度：	106
語文別：	英文
論文頁數：	158
中文關鍵詞：	層級分析、特別檢測、橋梁管理、維護及維、天然災害、優選排序、優選指標、目視檢測
外文關鍵詞：	AHP, Damage Inspection, Bridge Management,, MR&R, Natural Disaster,, Priority Ranking,, Priority Index, Visual Inspection.
相關次數：	點閱：27 下載：0
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

查詢本校圖書館目錄查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統勘誤回報

橋梁之管理維護已成為臺灣社會及經濟層面關注的議題，尤其對於災後受損橋梁
之維修，需在有限之經費及時間內完成。因此，需要一套可靠的橋梁結構安全評估方
式，能夠推估橋梁之受災潛勢，進而提供決策者具經濟性之管理維護資訊，使橋梁在
服務年限內能維持安全性、服務性及功能性。有鑑於此，針對天然災害後橋梁之特別
檢測及修復，建立一套優選排序模式有其必要性。

本研究提出一套災後橋梁優選排序模式，藉由橋梁結構易受損性及橋梁重要性等
參數，評估橋梁於災後進行特別檢測及修復之優先順序。本研究經由文獻回顧及專家
訪談得到優選排序所需之資訊，包含定義決策目標及必要之參數，再透過層級分析法
(Analytic Hierarchy Process, AHP)取得各參數之權重，以建立優選排序之模式。

本研究之優選排序模式可應用於不同種類之天然災害及造成交通設施驟然損壞之
情況，在需要迅速做出維護決策之狀態下，透過輸入安全性方面的關鍵參數、維修成
本效益及橋址環境，即可提供決策者簡單的系統化評估模式。本研究之成果可供公路
管理關用於路網層級之橋梁優選排序，並可應用於橋梁管理系統中。

Management of existing bridge infrastructure has become a major social and economic concern in Taiwan. This is due to the critical conditions of bridges driven by post-disaster deterioration and the controlled funds available to timely repair their deficiencies. However, reliable assessment of a bridge’s structural health is important to predict the progress of deterioration, to provide the required inputs for making cost-effective MR&R decisions; and to ensure that safety, serviceability, and functionality of a bridge can be sustained over its designed service life. In this regard, a model for prioritizing damage inspection of bridges for MR&R activities after natural disasters is necessary.

This thesis presents the development of a model, which proposes a method to facilitate post-disaster prioritization of bridges by virtue of their structural vulnerability and strategic importance to implement inspection and rehabilitation operations. To achieve this objective, this research combined literature and feedback from industry professionals through interviews as primary sources of data. The proposed model adapts an Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique. The research findings have identified decision objectives and parameters essential to rank bridge rehabilitation projects, and these are included within a framework to prioritize bridges while incorporating experts’ input in the process.

The developed model is a flexible framework, which is applicable to a variety of disaster events and other conditions causing abrupt damages to transport infrastructure where decisions on maintenance strategies must be made promptly. Specifically, it provides the decision-maker with a simplified and systematic approach to assess bridges by addressing the critical parameters of safety and cost-benefit in prioritizing funds and work allocation. The proposed model can be used by departments of transportation to rank bridges in a network, and it can be integrated within an existing bridge management system.

摘要 ....................................................................i
ABSTRACT ...............................................................ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................iv
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................vi
LIST OF TABLES..........................................................vii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................1
1 Research Background ................................................1
2 Problem Statements .................................................7
3 Research Objectives ................................................8
4 Methodology ........................................................9
5 Thesis Structure ...................................................11
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ...........................................12
1 Introduction .......................................................12
2 Bridge Structure ...................................................13
2.1 Bridge Category ..................................................14
2.2 Bridge Classification ............................................15
3 Bridge Management Systems ..........................................16
3.1 Structure of BMS .................................................18
3.1.1 Inventory Component ............................................19
3.1.2 Inspection Component ...........................................19
3.1.3 Financial Component ............................................19
3.1.4 Maintenance Component ..........................................19
3.2 Functions and Benefits of a BMS ..................................20
3.3 Limitations of a BMS .............................................20
4 Status of Bridge Management in Taiwan ..............................21
5 Bridge Inspection ..................................................23
5.1 Bridge Inspection in Taiwan ......................................26
5.2 DERU Methodology .................................................29
6 Bridge Inspection and Rating Systems in International Practices ....33
7 Priority-Ranking Techniques ........................................39
8 Prioritization of Bridges for Maintenance Needs ....................41
9 Chapter Summary ....................................................43
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY .................................................45
1 Introduction .......................................................45
2 Methods of Data Acquisition ........................................46
2.1 Literature review ................................................46
2.2 Expert Interview .................................................46
2.3 Inventory and Inspection Data Mining .............................47
3 Methods of Data Analysis ...........................................48
3.1 Factor Acquisition and Classification ............................48
1.1.1 Vulnerability of Damage (VD) ...................................51
1.1.2 Impact of Damage (ID) ..........................................52
4 Factor Quantification by AHP Approach ..............................53
4.1 Step 1: Determining the Criteria Weights .........................54
4.2 Step 2: Computing the Weighted Average Rating ....................57
5 Chapter Summary ....................................................58
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS .....................................................59
1 Introduction .......................................................59
2 Expert Interviews ..................................................59
2.1 General Overview .................................................59
2.2 Interview Results ................................................60
2.3 Expert Ratings ...................................................66
3 Findings and Discussion ............................................66
CHAPTER 5: MODEL DEVELOPMENT ...........................................68
1 Introduction .......................................................68
2 Developing the Hierarchy ...........................................68
3 Priority Setting: Evaluation of Analyzed Data ......................69
3.1 Development of the Priority Indices (PI and PR) ..................69
3.2 Priority Rating ..................................................69
4 Priority Category ..................................................73
5 Case Study: 2018 Hualien Earthquake ................................75
5.1 Case background ..................................................75
5.2 Model Validation .................................................76
6 Chapter Summary ....................................................85
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION ..................................................86
1 Introduction .......................................................86
2 Review of Research Objectives ......................................86
3 Conclusions ........................................................87
4 Limitations ........................................................88
5 Recommendations ....................................................89
6 Chapter Summary ....................................................89
REFERENCES .............................................................90
Appendix A: Questionnaire Script .......................................A-1
Appendix B: Individual Expert Responses ................................B-1
Appendix C: Importance Matrices ........................................C-1
Appendix D: Validation – Determination of P-Values .....................D-1
                                

[1] Hsien-Ke Liao, Mustapha Jallow, Nie-Jia Yau, Ming-Yi Jiang, Jyun-Hao Huang,
Cheng-Wei Su, Po-Yuan Chen, "Comparison of Bridge Inspection Methodologies and
Evaluation Criteria in Taiwan and Foreign Practices", Proceedings of the International
Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction, ISARC. Taipei, 2017.
[2] P. Nsabimana, “A method for prioritisation of concrete bridge inspections in South
Africa,” M.S., Civil Engineering, Stellenbosch University, 2015.
[3] K.-Y. Peng, C.H. Yeh, G.Y. Liu, and M.S. Wu, "Development and Application of
Taiwan Earthquake Loss Estimation System (TELES) in Highway Bridges",
Proceedings of the 11th US-Taiwan Bridge Engineering Workshop. Taipei, 2016.
[4] Y.-F. LI, S.-H. HSIEH, and Y.-S. LIN, “A Nondestructive Evaluation Module of Bridge
Management System,” The Seventh East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural
Engineering and Construction, Japan, 1999.
[5] C. A. B. E Costa, C. S. Oliveira, and V. Vieira, “Prioritization of bridges and tunnels in
earthquake risk mitigation using multicriteria decision analysis: Application to Lisbon,”
Omega, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 442-450, 2008.
[6] N. Yau, and H. Liao, “Establishing a Decision Support Module for bridge maintenance
in Taiwan,” Advanced Materials and Structural Engineering: Proceedings of the
International Conference on Advanced Materials and Engineering Structural
Technology (ICAMEST 2015) Qingdao, China, pp. 371, 2016.
[7] N. J. Yau, and Y. H. Chuang, “Analyzing Taiwan Bridge Management System for
decision making in bridge maintenance: A big data approach,” 10th International Joint
Conference on Software Technologies (ICSOFT), vol. 1, pp. 1-6, July 2015.
[8] E. K. Winn, "Artificial neural network models for the prediction of bridge deck
condition ratings", Masters Abstracts International. Vol. 50. No. 03. 2011.
[9] M. Liu, and D. M. Frangopol, “Bridge annual maintenance prioritization under
uncertainty by multiobjective combinatorial optimization,” Computer‐Aided Civil and
Infrastructure Engineering, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 343-353, 2005.
[10] H. Elbehairy, “Bridge management system with integrated life cycle cost optimization,”
PhD diss., Civil Engineering, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 2007.
[11] A. C. K. Wing, A. H. Mohammed, and M. N. Abdullah, “A Review of Maintenance
Priority Setting Methods”, International Journal of Real Estate Studies, Vol, 10. No. 2.
2016.
[12] Q. Shen, “A comparative study of priority setting methods for planned maintenance of
public buildings,” Facilities, vol. 15, no. 12/13, pp. 331-339, 1997.
[13] N. J. Yau, and H. K. Liao, “Indices for Fast Assessment of Bridge Condition in Taiwan,”
Applied Mechanics and Materials, vol. 752, pp. 689-697, April 2015.
[14] L. Elfgren, T. Blanksvärd, B. Täljsten, J. R. Casas, B. Bell, and K. Lundgren, “Guideline
for application of new technologies to extend life of elderly rail infrastructure”
Deliverable 1.4 in MAINLINE-a project within EC 7th Framework Programme, 2015.
[15] C. TMH19, “Manual for the visual assessment of road structures.,” South African
National Roads Agency Limited, 2013.
[16] R. Woodward, D. Cullington, A. Daly, P. Vassie, P. Haardt, R. Kashner, R. Astudillo,
C. Velando, B. Godart, And C. Cremona, “Bridge Management In Europe (Brime)-
Deliverable”, D14-Final Report, 2001.
[17] R. W. James, G. Stukhart, A. Garcia-Diaz, R. Bligh, and J. Sobanjo, “Analytical
approach to the development of a bridge management system, “ Transportation
Research Record, no. 1290, 1991.
[18] U. DOT, “Recording and coding guide for the structure inventory and appraisal of the
nation’s bridges,” US Department of Transportation, Bridge Management Branch,
1995.
[19] M. Safi, “LCC Applications for Bridges and Integration with BMS,” KTH Royal
Institute of Technology, PhD diss., KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 2012.
[20] M. J. Ryall, Bridge management: Elsevier, 2001.
[21] AASHTO, "Guidelines for Bridge Management Systems,” W. American Association
of State Highway and Transportation Official, D.C., 2001.
[22] A. AASHTO, “Policy on geometric design of highways and streets,” American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC, vol. 1, no.
990, pp. 158, 2001.
[23] P. Clausen, “Introduction to Bridge Management Systems, ” 14Th Congress New Delhi,
1992.
[24] R. W. Stratt, “Bridge Management a System Approach for Decision Making,” School
of Doctoral Studies European Union Journal, no. 2, 2010.
[25] M. Ryall, J. Harding, and G. Parke, Bridge management 4: inspection, maintenance,
assessment and repair: Thomas Telford, 2000.
[26] N.-J. Yau, and H.-K. Liao, “Visual Inspection and Evaluation for Special Bridges,” in
Proceedings of 2007 International Symposium on Integrated Life-Cycle Design &
Management of Infrastructures, Shanghai, China, pp. 195, 2007.
[27] Y.-H. C. N.-J. Yau., “ Analyzing Databases in the Taiwan Bridge Management System
Using Big Data Approaches,” ISEC PRESS; 2017.
[28] S.-H. H. Yeou-Fong LI, and Chi-Chang CHAN, “A Planning Multi-Level Bridge
Management System for Taiwan,” in 2000 Proceedings of the 17th ISARC, Taipei,
Taiwan, 2000.
[29] T. Omar, and M. L. Nehdi, “MAT-714: Condition Assessment And Deterioration
Prediction Tools For Concrete Bridges: A New Look,” Journal of Structural
Engineering, 129(6), pp.818-828, 2016.
[30] F. A. Branco, and J. d. Brito, “Handbook of concrete bridge management, ” American
Society of Civil Engineers, 2004.
[31] S. Abu Dabous, and S. Alkass, “A multi-attribute ranking method for bridge
management,” Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, vol. 17, no.
3, pp. 282-291, 2010.
[32] A. A. Taddesse, “Bridge Inspection Techniques,” PhD diss., Oklahoma State
University, 2011.
[33] M. S. Hasan, S. Setunge, D. W. Law, and Y.-C. Koay, “Forecasting deterioration of
bridge components from visual inspection data,” International Journal of Engineering
and Technology, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 40, 2015.
[34] M. O. Fumihiko Nomura, Takashi Tamakoshi, “Analysis Examples of Periodic
Inspection Results of National Highway Bridges in Japan -Application of degree of
damage for element level,” in Proceedings of The 27th US - Japan Bridge Engineering
Workshop, 2011.
[35] D. Tenžera, G. Puž, and J. Radić, “Visual inspection in evaluation of bridge condition,”
vol. 64, no. 09., 2012, pp. 717-726. https://hrcak.srce.hr/87717. Accessed 4 Aug. 2018.
[36] S. Abu Dabous, “A decision support methodology for rehabilitation management of
concrete bridges,” Ph.D. diss, Concordia University, Canada, 2008.
[37] C. G. Drury, and J. Watson, “Good practices in visual inspection,” Human factors in
aviation maintenance-phase nine, progress report, FAA/Human Factors in Aviation
Maintenance.@ URL: http://hfskyway. faa. gov, 2002.
[38] M. Moore, B. M. Phares, B. Graybeal, D. Rolander, and G. Washer, “Reliability of
visual inspection for highway bridges, ” Volume I. No. FHWA-RD-01-020, 2001.
[39] B. A. Graybeal, B. M. Phares, D. D. Rolander, M. Moore, and G. Washer, “Visual
inspection of highway bridges,” Journal of nondestructive evaluation, vol. 21, no. 3, pp.
67-83, 2002.
[40] W. T. Scherer, and D. M. Glagola, “Markovian models for bridge maintenance
management,” Journal of Transportation Engineering, vol. 120, no. 1, pp. 37-51, 1994.
[41] Y.-H. Chuang, and N.-J. Yau, “A Big Data Approach for Decision Making in Bridge
Maintenance,” International Journal of Structural and Civil Engineering Research Vol.
5, No. 3, 2016.
[42] H.-K. L. Chung-I Yen, Jhih-Jie Chai, Nie-Jia Yau, “A Heuristic Approach for
Optimizing Bridge Inspection Route,” The 5th International Conference on Bridge
Maintenance, Safety and Management (IABMAS2010), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
U.S.A. ,2010.
[43] N. Yau, and H. Liao, "An automated visual-aid system for inspecting concrete bridges."
Proc. of the Tenth Int. Conference on Civil, Structural and Environmental Engineering
Computing, Civil-Computing Press, Stirling, Scotland. 2005
[44] N.-J. Yau, Y.-H. Chuang, H.-K. Liao, M.-K. Tsai, C.-W. Su, and J.-H. Huang, “An
automatic three dimensional modelling system for bridge inspection.” The Tenth
International Conference on Civil, Structural and Environmental Engineering
Computing, Rome, 2005.
[45] G. Hearn, Bridge inspection practices: Transportation Research Board, 2007.
[46] N. J. Yau, and Y. H. Chuang, "Analyzing Taiwan Bridge Management System for
decision making in bridge maintenance: A big data approach." pp. 1-6.
[47] N. J. Yau, Liao, H.K., “Development Of Bridge Management Systems In Taiwan”
Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Construction Project Management
& 2nd International Conference on Construction Engineering and Management, pp. 92.
2007.
[48] H.-K. Liao, and N.-J. Yau, “Development of Various Bridge Condition Indices for
Taiwan Bridge Management System,” RED, vol. 101, no. 444, pp. 100-100, 2011.
[49] H.-K. Liao, “An Automated Visual-Aid System for Inspecting Concrete Bridges,” Phd.
Diss., Graduate Institute of Construction Engineering and Management, National
Central University, Taiwan, 2005.
[50] R. Connor, R. Dexter, and H. Mahmoud, “NCHRP synthesis 354,” Transportation
Research Board, Washington, DC, pp. 12, 2005.
[51] J. Lauridsen, and B. Lassen, "The Danish bridge management system DANBRO,"
Management of highway structures, pp. 61-70: Thomas Telford Publishing, 1999.
[52] T. D. Everett, P. Weykamp, H. A. Capers Jr, W. R. Cox, T. S. Drda, L. Hummel, P.
Jensen, D. A. Juntunen, T. Kimball, and G. A. Washer, Bridge evaluation quality
assurance in Europe, 2008.
[53] N. H. Andersen, “DANBRO—A bridge management system for many levels, ” Bridge
Evaluation, Repair and Rehabilitation, pp. 11-21: Springer, 1990.
[54] Chase, Steve B., Y. Adu-Gyamfi, A. E. Aktan, and E. Minaie. “Synthesis of national
and international methodologies used for bridge health indices”. No. FHWA-HRT-15-
081. United States. Federal Highway Administration, 2016.
[55] M. Shirato and T. Tamakoshi, “Bridge Inspection Standards in Japan and US,” in 29th
US - Japan Bridge Engineering Workshop. , Tsukuba, Japan,, 2013.
[56] G. Hearn, J. Puckett, I. Friedland, T. Everett, K. Hurst, G. Romack, G. Christian, R.
Shepard, T. Thompson, and R. Young, Bridge preservation and maintenance in europe
and south africa, 2005.
[57] R. Blakelock, “Experience in the Development of a Computerized Bridge Management
System and of Its Use in a Number of Authorities in the UK and Overseas,” In BRIDGE
MANAGEMENT 2: Inspection, Maintenance Assessment And Repair. Papers
Presented At The Second International Conference On Bridge Management Held 18-21
April 1993, University Of Surrey, Guildford 1993.
[58] J. Lee, “A methodology for developing bridge condition rating models based on limited
inspection records,”Phd. Diss. Gold Coast, Australia, Griffith University, 2007.
[59] G. Hayter, and B. Allison, “Structures Management Information System (SIMS),” Das,
P (Ed.)“Management of Highways Structures, pp. 153-162, 1999.
[60] “Bridge condition indicator guide TM-4008, On-line: http://bit.ly/2qhUj5Y,”
29/1/2017.
[61] NBIS, "Code of Federal Regulations, chapter 23, Part 650, Subpart C, U.S. Government
printing Office, Washington, D.C., USA, 2004.
[62] H. A. Ryan T., Mann J., and Danovich J., “Bridge Inspector's Reference Manual
(BIRM),” Volume 1(6). U.S. Federal Highway Admin, Washington, DC 20590, 2012.
[63] S. S. Wakchaure, and K. N. Jha, “Prioritization of bridges for maintenance planning
using data envelopment analysis,” Construction Management and Economics, vol. 29,
no. 9, pp. 957-968, 2011/09/01, 2011.
[64] R. Ranf, M. Eberhard, and S. Malone, “Post-earthquake prioritization of bridge
inspections,” Earthquake Spectra, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 131-146, 2007.
[65] T. Majid, and A. Yousefi, “Prioritization of highway bridges for seismic retrofitting
using multi criteria decision making,” In Proceedings, XV World conference on
earthquake engineering, Lisbon, 2012.
[66] A. Yousefi, M. S. S. Ahamad, and T. A. Majid, “Application of TOPSIS method in
prioritization of highway bridges for seismic retrofitting,” Engineering Structures and
Technologies, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 114-123, 2014.
[67] P. Duvenage, “Developing a Method for Prioritising Maintenance for Reinforced
Concrete Reservoirs,” Msc. Thesis, Stellenbosch University, 2015.
[68] H. Bakamwesiga, J. Mwakali, and S. Thelandersson, “Prioritizing maintenance of
highway bridges in Uganda,” International Journal of Technology Diffusion, Vol 2,
Issue 1, 2015, ISSN 2001-2837
[69] M. Rashidi, B. Samali, and P. Sharafi, “A new model for bridge management: Part A:
condition assessment and priority ranking of bridges,” Australian Journal of Civil
Engineering, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 35-45, 2016/01/01, 2016.
[70] A. Amini, N. Nikraz, and A. Fathizadeh, “Identifying and evaluating the effective
parameters in prioritization of urban roadway bridges for maintenance operations,”
Australian Journal of Civil Engineering, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 23-34, 2016.
[71] M. M. Rashid, and P. Herabat, “Multiattribute prioritization framework for bridges,
roadside elements, and traffic control devices maintenance,” Transportation Research
Circular E-C128, pp. 175-188, 2008.
[72] M. Rashidi, P. Gibson, and T. K. Ho, “A new approach to bridge infrastructure
management,” International Symposium for Next Generation Infrastructure October,
Wollongong, Australia, 2013.
[73] S. E. Chang, “Transportation planning for disasters: an accessibility approach,”
Environment and Planning A, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 1051-1072, 2003.
[74] S. A. Mehlhorn, Method for prioritizing highway routes for reconstruction after a
natural disaster: Phd. Diss.,The University of Memphis, 2009.
[75] M. M. Rashid, and P. Herabat, “Multiattribute prioritization framework for bridges,
roadside elements, and traffic control devices maintenance,” Transportation Research
Circular E-C128, pp. 175-188, October 2008.
[76] G. Pesti, A. Khattak, V. Kannan, P. McCoy, and M.-A. T. Center, “Decision aid for
prioritizing bridge deck anti-icing system installations,” In Proceedings of the 82nd
Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 2003.
[77] Z. Zhang, F. Aki, and W. R. Hudson, “Developing an integrated management system
for the urban transportation infrastructure,” Southwest Region University
Transportation Center, Center for Transportation Research, University of Texas, 2002.
[78] A. Khattak, and G. Pesti, “Bridge Prioritization for Installation of Automatic Anti-icing
Systems in Nebraska,” University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Mid-America Transportation
Center, 2003.
[79] T. L. Saaty, “Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector
necessary,” European journal of operational research, vol. 145, no. 1, pp. 85-91, 2003.
[80] S. Das, M. Chew, and K. L. Poh, “Multi‐criteria decision analysis in building
maintainability using analytical hierarchy process,” Construction Management and
Economics, vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 1043-1056, 2010.
[81] S.-J. Chen, C.-L. Hwang, and F. P. Hwang, “Fuzzy multiple attribute decision
making(methods and applications),” Lecture notes in economics and mathematical
systems, 2011.
[82] E. Triantaphyllou, and S. H. Mann, “Using the analytic hierarchy process for decision
making in engineering applications: some challenges,” International Journal of
Industrial Engineering: Applications and Practice, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 35-44, 1995.
[83] F.-H. F. Liu, and H. L. Hai, “The voting analytic hierarchy process method for selecting
supplier,” International journal of production economics, vol. 97, no. 3, pp. 308-317,
2005.
[84] T. L. Saaty, “Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process,” International
journal of services sciences, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 83-98, 2008.

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文