2016
DOI: 10.5194/nhess-16-995-2016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Brief communication: On direct impact probability of landslides on vehicles

Abstract: Abstract. When calculating the risk of railway or road users of being killed by a natural hazard, one has to calculate a temporal spatial probability, i.e. the probability of a vehicle being in the path of the falling mass when the mass falls, or the expected number of affected vehicles in case such of an event. To calculate this, different methods are used in the literature, and, most of the time, they consider only the dimensions of the falling mass or the dimensions of the vehicles. Some authors do however … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An extensive review of highway slope instability risk assessment systems is provided by Pantelidis (2011), including several qualitative and semi-quantitative methods (by semiquantitative we refer to the methodologies that assess the hazard in terms of numerical scores). A well-known example of semi-quantitative methods is the Rockfall Hazard Rating System (Pierson and Van Vickle, 1993) recommended by the FHWA (Federal Highway Administration of the United States), which was later adapted by Budetta (2004) specifically for rockfall risk along roads.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An extensive review of highway slope instability risk assessment systems is provided by Pantelidis (2011), including several qualitative and semi-quantitative methods (by semiquantitative we refer to the methodologies that assess the hazard in terms of numerical scores). A well-known example of semi-quantitative methods is the Rockfall Hazard Rating System (Pierson and Van Vickle, 1993) recommended by the FHWA (Federal Highway Administration of the United States), which was later adapted by Budetta (2004) specifically for rockfall risk along roads.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In what follows, we will consider the event passage frequency. The passage frequency can be determined either for a location whose width is the width of the element at risk [35] plus the width of a rock fragment if a lumped mass model is used for rockfall modelling, or for a wider area of interest [62,64]. In this case, the hazard is homogenized, and the more critical locations may not be detected.…”
Section: Diffuse Hazardmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For a moving element at risk (person or vehicle), it is the proportion of the time when it is in the considered location. For a vehicle moving perpendicularly to the trajectory of the block, the exposure is [57,62]…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The procedure for evaluating exposure of elements moving along linear features has long been known, but only a few practical examples have been recently published for its calculation (Roberds, 2005;Ferlisi et al, 2012, Nicolet et al, 2016Macciotta et al 2016). It is usually performed for infrastructures such as roads, railways and it is applicable to trail paths as well.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The encounter probability or exposure P (T │ X) has to consider both the width of the falling mass (Wr) and the length of the trail (lp) occupied by the person or group of persons (Nicolet et al 2016). It is calculated with equation [2], whose parameters are shown in Figure 1.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%