Landslides caused by rapid groundwater changes

Premchitt, J.; Brand, E W; Phillipson, H.B.

doi:10.1144/gsl.eng.1986.002.01.09

Cited by 19 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The changeable nature of such pipe systems, especially seasonally, with silting up and collapse causing blockage can cause backing up of the infiltrated water and local increase in water pressure as identified in the physical models of Pierson (1983). At depth preferential, channels/pipes can cause a rapid infiltration and response of groundwater pressure to rainfall (Premchitt et al, 1986), much quicker than would be predicted from an isotropic infiltration approach (Lumb, 1962;Ng and Shi, 1998;Iverson, 2000). A proposed framework for the timing of landslides is presented in Table I and discussed in more detail in Hencher et al (2006).…”

Section: Timing Of Landslidesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preferential flow paths through soil and rock and their association with landslides

Hencher

2010

Hydrological Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:This article discusses preferential flow paths through soil and rock and how these contribute to the style and timing of landslides. The importance of geological compartmentalization because of the presence of aquicludes such as weathered dykes and faults is emphasized as is channel flow through fracture networks and through natural pipes in soil-like material. Although piping is a contributing factor to some landslides, as generally recognized, it can also be a sign of inherent distress in a developing landslide where water flow exploits cracks in the dilating rock mass. It is suggested that the association might be targeted in ground investigation. Inactive or low activity pipe systems can be identified by the anomalous presence of alluvial sediments at depth in the geological profile, whereas active pipe systems may simply comprise voids that could be misinterpreted as core loss during ground investigation. Examples of pipe systems encountered during ground investigations are given for various landslides and several case studies are illustrated in this article. Mitigation measures for preventing landslides triggered by rainfall are discussed together with the difficulties associated with preferential flow paths.

show abstract

Section: Timing Of Landslidesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preferential flow paths through soil and rock and their association with landslides

Hencher

2010

Hydrological Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This shows that during the process of changing landslide proportion in the watershed over the years, the ecohydrological processes were altered. The variation in ecohydrological processes in landslide areas could be because the failures caused by landslide are mainly attributed to rapid transient variations in groundwater conditions [57].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating Landscape Metrics and Hydrologic Modeling to Assess the Impact of Natural Disturbances on Ecohydrological Processes in the Chenyulan Watershed, Taiwan

Chiang

Chuang

Han

2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Chenyulan watershed, located in the central mountain area of Taiwan, has been suffering from earthquakes, typhoons, and heavy rainfalls in recent decades. These sequential natural disturbances have a cumulative impact on the watershed, leading to more fragile and fragmented land cover and loss of capacity of soil water conservation. In this study, the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) and a landscape metrics tool (FRAGSTATS) were used to assess the direct impact (e.g., by annual rainfall) and indirect impact (e.g., by landscape configuration and composition) of natural disturbances on the ecohydrological processes of the Chenyulan watershed. Six SPOT satellite images from 2008 to 2013 were analyzed by using the nearest feature line embedding (NFLE) approach and reclassified into six land cover types: forest, cultivated land, grassland, river, landslide, and built-up. Forest was found to have the largest patch size, indicating that it is more resilient to disturbances, while agricultural land tended to expand from the river side toward the hill. Two land cover change scenarios were compared in the SWAT model. The results showed that there was no significant difference in simulated streamflow during 2004–2015 and sediment loading during 2004–2009; however, the model performed better for sediment loading during 2010–2015 with dynamic land cover change (coefficient of determination (R2) = 0.66, Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency coefficient (NSE) = 0.62, percent bias (PBIAS) = 10.5%, root mean square error observation standard deviation ratio (RSR) = 0.62) than with constant land cover (R2 = 0.61, NSE = 0.54, PBIAS = −17.3%, RSR = 0.68), indicating that long-term land cover change should be considered in hydrologic modeling. Changes in landslides during 2008–2013 were found to significantly affect ecohydrological processes, especially after 2011. In general, annual precipitation plays a dominant role, and landscape composition had by far the strongest influence on water yield and sediment yield compared to landscape configuration. The results can be useful for understanding the effects of land cover change on ecohydrological processes in the Chenyulan watershed and the potential impact of ecohydrological changes on the environment and public health.

show abstract

“…Previous studies have suggested that for certain landslides high peak intensity can contribute significantly to triggering a landslide independent of the overall storm depth, duration or intensity (Corominas et al, 2002;Yu et al, 2006). This idea is supported for example by observations that landslides are commonly initialized within hours of the peak intensity (Premchitt et al, 1986). The precipitation rank and z-score among the four products for each landslide event were also computed for the day of the landslide as well as for the full May 2015-May 2020 precipitation record.…”

Section: Precipitation Inter-comparison and Computation Of Storm Charmentioning

confidence: 92%

A Multi-sensor Evaluation of Precipitation Uncertainty for Landslide-triggering Storm Events

Culler

Badger

Minear

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extreme precipitation can have profound consequences for communities, resulting in natural hazards such as rainfall-triggered landslides that cause casualties and extensive property damage. A key challenge to understanding and predicting rainfall-triggered landslides comes from observational uncertainties in the depth and intensity of precipitation preceding the event. Practitioners and researchers must select among a wide range of precipitation products, often with little guidance. Here we evaluate the degree of precipitation uncertainty across multiple precipitation products for a large set of landslide-triggering storm events and investigate the impact of these uncertainties on predicted landslide probability using published intensity-duration thresholds. The average intensity, peak intensity, duration, and NOAA-Atlas return periods are compared ahead of 228 reported landslides across the continental US and Canada. Precipitation data are taken from four products that cover disparate measurement methods: near real-time and post-processed satellite (IMERG), radar (MRMS), and gauge-based (NLDAS-2). Landslide-triggering precipitation was found to vary widely across precipitation products with the depth of individual storm events diverging by as much as 296 mm with an average range of 51 mm. Peak intensity measurements, which are typically influential in triggering landslides, were also highly variable with an average range of 7.8 mm/hr and as much as 57 mm/hr. The two products more reliant upon ground-based observations (MRMS and NLDAS-2) performed better at identifying landslides according to published intensity-duration storm thresholds, but all products exhibited hit-ratios of greater than 0.56. A greater proportion of landslides were predicted when including only manually-verified landslide locations. We recommend practitioners consider low-latency products like MRMS for investigating landslides, given their near-real time data availability and good performance in detecting landslides. Practitioners would be well-served considering more than one product as a way to confirm intense storm signals and minimize the influence of noise and false alarms.

show abstract

Landslides caused by rapid groundwater changes

Cited by 19 publications

References 9 publications

Preferential flow paths through soil and rock and their association with landslides

Preferential flow paths through soil and rock and their association with landslides

Integrating Landscape Metrics and Hydrologic Modeling to Assess the Impact of Natural Disturbances on Ecohydrological Processes in the Chenyulan Watershed, Taiwan

A Multi-sensor Evaluation of Precipitation Uncertainty for Landslide-triggering Storm Events

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About