Significance of substrate soil moisture content for rockfall hazard assessment
-
Published:2019-05-27
Issue:5
Volume:19
Page:1105-1117
-
ISSN:1684-9981
-
Container-title:Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.
Author:
Vick Louise MaryORCID, Zimmer Valerie, White Christopher, Massey Chris, Davies Tim
Abstract
Abstract. Rockfall modelling is an important tool for hazard analysis in
steep terrain. Calibrating terrain parameters ensures that the model results
more accurately represent the site-specific hazard. Parameterizing rockfall
models is challenging because rockfall runout is highly sensitive to initial
conditions, rock shape, size and material properties, terrain morphology, and
terrain material properties. This contribution examines the mechanics of
terrain impact scarring due to rockfall on the Port Hills of Christchurch,
New Zealand. We use field-scale testing and laboratory direct shear testing
to quantify how the changing moisture content of the loessial soils can
influence its strength from soft to hard, and vice versa. We calibrate the three-dimensional rockfall model RAMMS by back-analysing
several well-documented rockfall events that occurred at a site with dry
loessial soil conditions. We then test the calibrated “dry” model at a
site where the loessial soil conditions were assessed to be wet. The
calibrated dry model over-predicts the runout distance when wet loessial
soil conditions are assumed. We hypothesize that this is because both the
shear strength and stiffness of wet loess are reduced relative to the dry
loess, resulting in a higher damping effect on boulder dynamics. For both
realistic and conservative rockfall modelling, the maximum credible hazard
is usually assumed; for rockfall on loess slopes, the maximum credible
hazard occurs during dry soil conditions.
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences
Reference52 articles.
1. Azzoni, A. and de Freitas, M. H.: Experimentally gained parameters, decisive
for rock fall analysis, Rock Mech. Rock Eng., 28, 111–124,
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01020064, 1995. 2. Bannister, S. and Gledhill, K.: Evolution of the 2010–2012 Canterbury
earthquake sequence, New Zeal. J. Geol. Geop., 55, 295–304,
https://doi.org/10.1080/00288306.2012.680475, 2012. 3. Bartelt, P., Bieler, C., Bühler, Y., Christen, M., Christen, M., Dreier,
L., Gerber, W., Glover, J., Schneider, M., Glocker, C., Leine, R., and
Schweizer, A.: RAMMS::ROCKFALL User Manual v1.6., available at:
http://ramms.slf.ch/ramms/downloads/RAMMS_ROCK_Manual.pdf (last access:
11 January 2019), 2016. 4. Beavan, J., Fielding, E., Motagh, M., Samsonov, S., and Donnelly, N.: Fault
Location and Slip Distribution of the 22 February 2011 Mw 6.2
Christchurch, New Zealand, Earthquake from Geodetic Data, Seismol. Res.
Lett., 82, 789–799, https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.82.6.789, 2011. 5. Bell, D. H. and Crampton, N. A.: Panel report: Engineering geological
evaluation of tunnelling conditions, Lyttelton-Woolston LPG Project,
Christchurch, New Zealand, in 5th International Congress of the International
Association of Engineering Geology, AA Balkema, Buenos Aires, 2485–2502,
1986.
Cited by
17 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|