Rock slope response to strong earthquake shaking

Massey, Chris; Pasqua, Fernando Della; Holden, Caroline; Kaiser, Anna; Richards, L.; Wartman, Joseph; McSaveney, Mauri; Archibald, Garth; Yetton, Mark D.; Janků, Lukáš

doi:10.1007/s10346-016-0684-8

Cited by 59 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The response of a slope to the dynamic stress induced by seismic waves is the result of a complex interaction among the frequency and energy content of the seismic waves, which depend on the source mechanism of the earthquake, the path-specific attenuation, and the local site conditions (material, layering, topography, etc.) that can amplify or de-amplify the shaking at specific wavelengths (Massey et al, 2017;Meunier et al, 2008;Sepúlveda et al, 2005). Several studies investigated the relative contributions of the earthquake source, path, and local site effects on the site-specific amplification phenomena (Ashford & Sitar, 2002;Del Gaudio & Wasowski, 2011;Gischig et al, 2015;Jibson, 2011;Moore et al, 2011;Rizzitano et al, 2014;Strenk & Wartman, 2011).…”

Section: Initiation and Failure Mechanisms: Experimental Studies 22mentioning

confidence: 99%

Earthquake‐Induced Chains of Geologic Hazards: Patterns, Mechanisms, and Impacts

Fan

Scaringi

Korup

et al. 2019

Reviews of Geophysics

655

325

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large earthquakes initiate chains of surface processes that last much longer than the brief moments of strong shaking. Most moderate‐ and large‐magnitude earthquakes trigger landslides, ranging from small failures in the soil cover to massive, devastating rock avalanches. Some landslides dam rivers and impound lakes, which can collapse days to centuries later, and flood mountain valleys for hundreds of kilometers downstream. Landslide deposits on slopes can remobilize during heavy rainfall and evolve into debris flows. Cracks and fractures can form and widen on mountain crests and flanks, promoting increased frequency of landslides that lasts for decades. More gradual impacts involve the flushing of excess debris downstream by rivers, which can generate bank erosion and floodplain accretion as well as channel avulsions that affect flooding frequency, settlements, ecosystems, and infrastructure. Ultimately, earthquake sequences and their geomorphic consequences alter mountain landscapes over both human and geologic time scales. Two recent events have attracted intense research into earthquake‐induced landslides and their consequences: the magnitude M 7.6 Chi‐Chi, Taiwan earthquake of 1999, and the M 7.9 Wenchuan, China earthquake of 2008. Using data and insights from these and several other earthquakes, we analyze how such events initiate processes that change mountain landscapes, highlight research gaps, and suggest pathways toward a more complete understanding of the seismic effects on the Earth's surface.

show abstract

Section: Initiation and Failure Mechanisms: Experimental Studies 22mentioning

confidence: 99%

Earthquake‐Induced Chains of Geologic Hazards: Patterns, Mechanisms, and Impacts

Fan

Scaringi

Korup

et al. 2019

Reviews of Geophysics

655

325

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…S17). Several authors have shown that ridge sharpness promotes topographic amplification (Maufroy et al, 2015;Rai et al, 2016). The landslide position would thus reflect the expression of strong ground motion in the uppermost part of the slope, which can be explained by complex interactions of various seismic waves with both topography and lithology.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Storminduced landslides are preferentially triggered low on slopes due to riverbank erosion and high groundwater pressure (Lin et al, 2011;Meunier et al, 2008;Tseng et al, 2018). By contrast, earthquake-triggered landslides are more uniformly distributed since ground shaking affects all portions of the hillslope (Densmore and Hovius, 2000), or they are concen-trated near ridges or slope breaks (Harp and Jibson, 1996;Massey et al, 2017;Sepúlveda et al, 2010;Weissel and Stark, 2001). Numerical simulations of ground shaking in complex topographies predict that seismic waves are actually amplified around ridge crests (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic and geologic controls on spatial clustering of landslides in three large earthquakes

Rault¹,

Robert

Marc

et al. 2019

Earth Surf. Dynam.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The large, shallow earthquakes at Northridge, California (1994), Chi-Chi, Taiwan (1999), and Wenchuan, China (2008), each triggered thousands of landslides. We have determined the position of these landslides along hillslopes, normalizing for statistical bias. The landslide patterns have a co-seismic signature, with clustering at ridge crests and slope toes. A cross-check against rainfall-induced landslide inventories seems to confirm that crest clustering is specific to seismic triggering as observed in previous studies. In our three study areas, the seismic ground motion parameters and lithologic and topographic features used do not seem to exert a primary control on the observed patterns of landslide clustering. However, we show that at the scale of the epicentral area, crest and toe clustering occur in areas with specific geological features. Toe clustering of seismically induced landslides tends to occur along regional major faults. Crest clustering is concentrated at sites where the lithology along hillslopes is approximately uniform, or made of alternating soft and hard strata, and without strong overprint of geological structures. Although earthquake-induced landslides locate higher on hillslopes in a statistically significant way, geological features strongly modulate the landslide position along the hillslopes. As a result the observation of landslide clustering on topographic ridges cannot be used as a definite indicator of the topographic amplification of ground shaking.

show abstract

“…CL boulders ( Fig. 4g-k) are more texturally homogenous, contain fewer vesicles (estimated ∼< 1 %), and exhibit a higher relative density (Carey et al, 2014;Muktar, 2014). The pre-CES CL boulder surfaces exhibit low surface rough- ness (i.e., smooth compared with VB boulders).…”

Section: Boulder Morphology and Other Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geologic and geomorphic controls on rockfall hazard: how well do past rockfalls predict future distributions?

Borella

Quigley

Krauss

et al. 2019

Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. To evaluate the geospatial hazard relationships between recent (contemporary) rockfalls and their prehistoric predecessors, we compare the locations, physical characteristics, and lithologies of rockfall boulders deposited during the 2010–2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence (CES) (n=185) with those deposited prior to the CES (n=1093). Population ratios of pre-CES to CES boulders at two study sites vary spatially from ∼5:1 to 8.5:1. This is interpreted to reflect (i) variations in CES rockfall flux due to intra- and inter-event spatial differences in ground motions (e.g., directionality) and associated variations in source cliff responses; (ii) possible variations in the triggering mechanism(s), frequency, flux, record duration, boulder size distributions, and post-depositional mobilization of pre-CES rockfalls relative to CES rockfalls; and (iii) geological variations in the source cliffs of CES and pre-CES rockfalls. On interfluves, CES boulders traveled approximately 100 to 250 m further downslope than prehistoric (pre-CES) boulders. This is interpreted to reflect reduced resistance to CES rockfall transport due to preceding anthropogenic hillslope de-vegetation. Volcanic breccia boulders are more dimensionally equant and rounded, are larger, and traveled further downslope than coherent lava boulders, illustrating clear geological control on rockfall hazard. In valley bottoms, the furthest-traveled pre-CES boulders are situated further downslope than CES boulders due to (i) remobilization of pre-CES boulders by post-depositional processes such as debris flows and (ii) reduction of CES boulder velocities and travel distances by collisional impacts with pre-CES boulders. A considered earth-systems approach is required when using preserved distributions of rockfall deposits to predict the severity and extents of future rockfall events.

show abstract

Rock slope response to strong earthquake shaking

Cited by 59 publications

References 27 publications

Earthquake‐Induced Chains of Geologic Hazards: Patterns, Mechanisms, and Impacts

Earthquake‐Induced Chains of Geologic Hazards: Patterns, Mechanisms, and Impacts

Seismic and geologic controls on spatial clustering of landslides in three large earthquakes

Geologic and geomorphic controls on rockfall hazard: how well do past rockfalls predict future distributions?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About