2020
DOI: 10.1007/s10346-020-01478-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modeling the landslide-generated debris flow from formation to propagation and run-out by considering the effect of vegetation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

2
29
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 66 publications
2
29
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The evaluation of RR-recovery depends on the original conditions of a stand too. For example, Liu et al [10] state that recovery in forest gaps is faster than in closed forest, whereby the term of comparison is completely different. For instance, in forest opening root reinforcement is dominated by small roots that regrow faster after disturbances due to grass regrowth and tree regeneration.…”
Section: Root Reinforcement Dynamicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The evaluation of RR-recovery depends on the original conditions of a stand too. For example, Liu et al [10] state that recovery in forest gaps is faster than in closed forest, whereby the term of comparison is completely different. For instance, in forest opening root reinforcement is dominated by small roots that regrow faster after disturbances due to grass regrowth and tree regeneration.…”
Section: Root Reinforcement Dynamicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Post-event time windows of increased shallow landslide disposition may range from a few years [3,6] to several decades [5,7] depending on the disturbance severity, tree species concerned, and site characteristics. While the recovery of vegetation cover in the short term has in general an important effect in reducing the runoff in the contribution area of a potential landslide and in the related effect on building of pore water pressure [8], in the long term, root reinforcement becomes the dominant factor for slope stability in areas of potential shallow landslides [9,10].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As for the damage distribution, hazards on hanging walls are denser in distribution, wider in scope, and larger in scale, comparing to footwall [12,23,24]. Large-scale landslides on fault-hanging walls generate a large number of loose deposits in the gully or valley, which provide ample sources of loose material for later debris flows under rainstorm scenarios [7,12,25]. When heavy rain falls on mountain torrents with complex geological conditions (such as steep terrain, large slopes, many loose materials, and soft lithology) [7,12], and the critical disaster-causing rainfall threshold is reached, debris flows are easily triggered [12,13,25,26].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Large-scale landslides on fault-hanging walls generate a large number of loose deposits in the gully or valley, which provide ample sources of loose material for later debris flows under rainstorm scenarios [7,12,25]. When heavy rain falls on mountain torrents with complex geological conditions (such as steep terrain, large slopes, many loose materials, and soft lithology) [7,12], and the critical disaster-causing rainfall threshold is reached, debris flows are easily triggered [12,13,25,26]. The long-term potential threat of landslides and debris flows in earthquake-stricken areas has a very obvious time lag effect [3,[27][28][29], and may be as long as 30 years in Wenchuan [26,30].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%