Please wait a minute...

Frontiers of Earth Science

Front. Earth Sci.    2015, Vol. 9 Issue (2) : 165-178     DOI: 10.1007/s11707-014-0485-0
RESEARCH ARTICLE |
Development of a GIS-based failure investigation system for highway soil slopes
Raghav RAMANATHAN1,Ahmet H. AYDILEK2,*(),Burak F. TANYU3
1. Paul C. Rizzo Associates, Inc., 500 Penn Center Blvd., Pittsburgh PA 15235, USA
2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Maryland, MD 20742, USA
3. Department of Civil, Environmental and Infrastructure Engineering, George Mason University, Fairfax VA 22030, USA
Download: PDF(2254 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

A framework for preparation of an early warning system was developed for Maryland, using a GIS database and a collective overlay of maps that highlight highway slopes susceptible to soil slides or slope failures in advance through spatial and statistical analysis. Data for existing soil slope failures was collected from geotechnical reports and field visits. A total of 48 slope failures were recorded and analyzed. Six factors, including event precipitation, geological formation, land cover, slope history, slope angle, and elevation were considered to affect highway soil slope stability. The observed trends indicate that precipitation and poor surface or subsurface drainage conditions are principal factors causing slope failures. 96% of the failed slopes have an open drainage section. A majority of the failed slopes lie in regions with relatively high event precipitation (P>200 mm). 90% of the existing failures are surficial erosion type failures, and only 1 out of the 42 slope failures is deep rotational type failure. More than half of the analyzed slope failures have occurred in regions having low density land cover. 46% of failures are on slopes with slope angles between 20° and 30°. Influx of more data relating to failed slopes should give rise to more trends, and thus the developed slope management system will aid the state highway engineers in prudential budget allocation and prioritizing different remediation projects based on the literature reviewed on the principles, concepts, techniques, and methodology for slope instability evaluation (Leshchinsky et al., 2015).

Keywords soil slope      slope management system      geographic information system      hazard mapping     
Corresponding Authors: Ahmet H. AYDILEK   
Just Accepted Date: 03 December 2014   Online First Date: 28 January 2015    Issue Date: 30 April 2015
 Cite this article:   
Raghav RAMANATHAN,Ahmet H. AYDILEK,Burak F. TANYU. Development of a GIS-based failure investigation system for highway soil slopes[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2015, 9(2): 165-178.
 URL:  
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fesci/EN/10.1007/s11707-014-0485-0
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fesci/EN/Y2015/V9/I2/165
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
Raghav RAMANATHAN
Ahmet H. AYDILEK
Burak F. TANYU
Fig.1  The study area with elevations and locations of slope failures.
Fig.2  A generalized geological map of the State of Maryland (Source: Maryland Geological Survey, www.mgs.md.gov/).
Fig.3  Distribution of failures in the different subcategories of (a) elevation and (b) slope angle.
Fig.4  The failure distribution pattern for the different storm events (a) 2 year 24 h duration, and (b) 100 year 24 h duration.
Fig.5  The distribution of slope failures for different classes of (a) land covers, and (b) failure type.
Failure type Failure type sub- classification
Rotational failure—Circular Deep
Rotational failure—Noncircular Deep Shallow
Translational failure Block Slide
Others Landslide Flow Spread
Erosion Head Toe Flank Body
Tab.1  Proposed failure type classification used in the current study (after Cruden and Varnes, 1996)
Fig.6  Slope failure distribution patterns for different (a) slope types, and (b) slope drainage section type.
Fig.7  The slope failure distribution patterns for different (a) physiographic provinces, and (b) lithology or soil type.
Fig.8  Schematic of the mapping system used in the current study. The system uses the qualitative index overlay model with a raster output.
Factor Subclass Area ratio Failure density index Normalized index
Slope angle/(°) <10 89.4 0.2083 0.4545
10–20 8.7 0.3125 0.6818
20–30 1.6 0.4583 1.0000
30–40 0.3 0.0208 0.0455
>40 0.0 0.0000 0.0000
Land cover (based on NLCD classification) Grass 13.9 0.5625 1.0000
Shrubs 1.6 0.0417 0.0741
Woodland 31.8 0.0625 0.1111
Developed land 2.5 0.2292 0.4074
Cultivated land 30.4 0.0208 0.0370
Other: Wetlands, Barren 19.7 0.0833 0.1481
Elevation/m <10 27.7 0.1250 0.2222
10–30 18.9 0.2292 0.4074
30–90 14.2 0.5625 1.0000
90–270 28.2 0.0833 0.1481
>270 9.4 0.0000 0.0000
Physiographic province (Maryland Geological Survey) Appalachian Plateaus Province 7.4 0.0000 0.0000
Ridge and Valley Province 6.7 0.0000 0.0000
Piedmont Plateau Province 26.3 0.1667 0.2000
Blue Ridge Province 2.9 0.0000 0.0000
Atlantic Coastal Plain Province 56.6 0.8333 1.0000
Storm event precipitation- 2 year recurrence, 6 hrs. duration/mm <56 26 0.0000 0.0000
56–58 17 0.6250 1.0000
58–60 27 0.2500 0.4000
60–62 17 0.0000 0.0000
>62 13 0.1250 0.2000
Storm event precipitation- 100 year recurrence, 6 hrs. duration/mm <135 30 0.0000 0.0000
135–140 34 0.7292 1.0000
140–145 13 0.1458 0.2000
145–150 19 0.1250 0.1714
>150 5 0.0000 0.0000
Tab.2  Physical parameters classified into sub-categories along with the density and normalized indices for each sub categories
Fig.9  Variation of the failure density index and normalized failure density for the subclasses of parameters (a) slope angle and (b) storm event precipitation (100 yr, 24 h).
Fig.10  Variation of failure density indices for the different parameter subclasses over the area of the study region.
Factor Map 1 Map 2 Map 3 Map 4
Slope angle 1 3 1 3
Land cover 1 3 1 3
Elevation 1 1 1 1
Physiographic provinces 1 2 1 2
Storm event precipitation – 2 yr recurrence 24 h duration 1 3 0 0
Storm event precipitation- 100 yr recurrence 24 h duration 0 0 1 3
Slope failure history 1 2 1 2
Tab.3  The weightage scheme assumed for the different test maps
Fig.11  Failure density maps generated by layers and weights provided in Table 2. (a) Follows weighing scheme – Map 1 (b) follows weighing scheme – Map 2 (c) follows weighing scheme – Map 3 (d) follows weighing scheme – Map 4.
1 Aleotti P, Chowdhury R (1999). Landslide hazard assessment: summary review and new perspectives. Bull Eng Geol Environ, 58(1): 21–44
doi: 10.1007/s100640050066
2 Anbalagan R, Singh B (1996). Landslide hazard and risk assessment mapping of mountainous terrains—A case study from Kumaun Hymalaya, India. Eng Geol, 43(4): 237–246
doi: 10.1016/S0013-7952(96)00033-6
3 Army U S (2003). Living on the Coast: Protecting Investments in Shore Property on the Great Lakes. Great Lakes Hydraulics and Hydrology Office, Detroit District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Detrioit, MI. http://www.ijc.org/files/tinymce/uploaded/Living%20On%20The%20Coast.pdf (accessed on <day>10</day><month>September</month>2014)
4 BBC (2014). Japan landslides kill 32 in Hiroshima prefecture. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-28862949 (accessed on <day>10</day><month>September</month>2014).
5 Bhattarai P, Tiwari B, Marui H, Aoyama K (2004). Quantitative Slope Stability Mapping With ArcGIS: Prioritize Highway Maintenance. Proceedings of ESRI’s 24th Annual International User’s Conference, San Diego. ESRI.
6 Brundsen D (1973). Application of systems theory to the study of mass movement. Geologica e Idrogeologia, Univ. of Baria.
7 Cardinali M, Reichenbach P, Guzzetti F, Ardizzone F, Antonini G, Galli M, Cacciano M, Castellani M, Salvati P (2002). A geomorphological approach to the estimation of landlside hazards and risks in Umbria, Central Italy. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci, 2(1/2): 57–72
doi: 10.5194/nhess-2-57-2002
8 Carrara A, Guzzetti F, Cardinali M, Reichenbach P (1999). Use of GIS technology in the prediction and monitoring of landslide hazard. Nat Hazards, 20(2/3): 117–135
doi: 10.1023/A:1008097111310
9 Cavallo A, Norese M F (2001). GIS and Multicriteria Analysis to Evaluate Map Erosion and Landslide Hazards. Informatica., 12: 25–44 (Lithunian Academy of Sciences.)
10 Chase R, Edil T, Kehew A, Keillor P, Mickelson D (2005). Stabilizing Coastal Slopes on the Great Lakes, University of Wisonsin Se Grant Institute, Madison, WI. http://www.seagrant.umn.edu/downloads/ch003.pdf (accessed on <day>10</day><month>September</month>2014)
11 Chau K T, Sze Y L, Fung M K, Wong W Y, Fong E L, Chan L C P (2004). Landslide hazardanalysis for Hong Kong using landslide inventory and GIS. Computers and Geosciences, 30(4): 429–443
12 Chung C J F, Fabbri A G (1999). Probabilistic Prediction Models for Landslide Hazard Mapping. Photogramm Eng Remote Sensing, 65(12): 1389–1399
13 Clerici A, Perego S, Tellini C, Vescovi P (2002). A procedure for landslide susceptibility zonation by the conditional analysis method. Geomorphology, 48(4): 349–364
doi: 10.1016/S0169-555X(02)00079-X
14 Cruden D M, Varnes D J (1996). Landslides: types and processes. In: Turner A K, Schuster L R, eds. Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation. Transportation Research Board Special Report, No. 247, 36–75
15 Dai F C, Lee C F (2002). Landslide characterisitcs and slope instability modelling using GIS, Lantau Island, Hong Kong. Geomorphology, 42(3–4): 213–228
doi: 10.1016/S0169-555X(01)00087-3
16 Dikau R, Brundsen D, Schrott L, Ibsen M L (1996). Landslide Recognition: Identification, Movement and Causes. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 274 p
17 Edwards J Jr (1981). A brief description of the geology of Maryland. Pamphlet Series. Maryland Geological Survey, http://md.water.usgs.gov/publications/wsp-2275/md-dc-html.html (accessed on <day>9</day><month>September</month>2014)
18 Fall M, Azzam R, Noubactep C (2006). A multi-method approach to study the stability of natural slopes and landslide susceptibility mapping. Eng Geol, 82(4): 241–263
doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2005.11.007
19 Fenti V, Silvano S, Spagna V (1979). Methodological proposal for an engineering geomorphological map, forecasting rockfalls in the Alps. Bulletin of the International Association of Engineering Geology, 19(1): 134–138
doi: 10.1007/BF02600465
20 Freitag B, Bolton S, Westerlund F, Clark J (2009). Floodplain Management: A New Approach for a New Era. Island Press, p 77
21 Glade T, Anderson M, Crozier M J (2005). Landslide Hazard and Risk. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 824 p
22 Gorsevski P V, Gessler P E, Foltz R B, Elliot W J (2006). Spatial Prediction of Landslide Hazard Using Logistic Regression and ROC Analysis. Transactions in GIS, 10(3): 395–415
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9671.2006.01004.x
23 Gupta P, Anbalagan R (1997). Slope stability of Theri Dam Reservoir Area, India, using landslide hazard zonation (LHZ) mapping. Q J Eng Geol, 30(1): 27–36
doi: 10.1144/GSL.QJEGH.1997.030.P1.03
24 Guzzetti F, Carrara A, Cardinali M, Reichenbach P (1999). Landslide hazard evaluation: a review of current techniques and their application in a multi-scale study, Central Italy. Geomorphology, 31(1–4): 181–216
doi: 10.1016/S0169-555X(99)00078-1
25 He Y, Beighley E R (2008). GIS-based regional landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study in southern California. Earth Surf Process Landf, 33(3): 380–393
doi: 10.1002/esp.1562
26 Wang H, Liu G, Xu W, Wang G (2005). GIS-based landslide hazard assessment: an overview. Prog Phys Geogr, 29(4): 548–567
doi: 10.1191/0309133305pp462ra
27 Kienholz H (1978). Maps of geomorphology and natural hazard of Griendelwald, Switzerland, scale 1:10 000. Artic and Alpine Research 10: 169–184
28 KING5 (2014). Oso landslide body officially identified, KING5.com, http://www.king5.com/story/local/2014/09/10/14035060/ (accessed on <day>10</day><month>September</month>2014)
29 Lee S, Choi J (2004). Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS and the weight-of-evidence model. Int J Geogr Inf Sci, 18(8): 789–814
doi: 10.1080/13658810410001702003
30 Leroi E (1996). Landslide hazard-risk maps at different scales: objectives, tools and developements. In: Senneset K, ed. Landslides. Rotterdam: Balkema, 35–51
31 McGee W J (1888). The Geology of the Head of Chesapeake Bay. Geological Survey 7th Annual Report, 537–646
32 Morton D M, Alvares R M, Campbell R H (2003). Preliminary Soil-Slip Susceptibility Maps, Southwestern California, US Geological Survey Open-File Report 03–17
33 NRC (2004). Partnerships for Reducing Landslide Risk: Assessment of the National Landslide Hazards Mitigation Strategy. National Research Council, National Academies Press: Washington, DC; 131
34 Popescu M E (2002). Landslide Causal Factors and Landslide Remedial Options. Proceedings 3rd International Conference on Landslides, Slope Stability and Safety of Infra-Structures, Singapore. 61–81
35 Ramanathan R S (2012). Soil Slope Failure Investigation Management System. M.S. Thesis, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 121 p
36 Rupke J, Cammeraat E, Seijmonsbergen A C, van Westen C J V (1988). Engineering geomorphology of Widentobel Catchment, Appenzell and Sankt Gallen, Switzerland: a geomorphological inventory system applied to geotechnical appraisal of slope stability. Eng Geol, 26(1): 33–68
doi: 10.1016/0013-7952(88)90005-1
37 Saboya F, da Glória Alves M, Dias Pinto W (2006). Assessment of failure susceptibility of soil slopes using fuzzy logic. Eng Geol, 86(4): 211–224
doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2006.05.001
38 Sakellariou M G, Ferentinou M D (2001). GIS-based estimation of Slope Stability. Nat Hazards Rev, 2(1): 12–21
doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)1527-6988(2001)2:1(12)
39 Selby M J (1993). Hillslope Materials and Processes. Oxford University Press, 451 p
40 Singh H, Huat B B (2008). Slope Assessment Systems: a review and evaluation of current techniques used for cut slopes in mountainous terrain of West Malaysia. Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 13: 1–24
41 Skempton A W (1953). Soil Mechanics in relation to geology. Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geology Society, 29(1): 33–62
doi: 10.1144/pygs.29.1.33
42 Turner A K, Schuster R L (1996). Lanslides: Investigation and Mitigation. Washington D.C.: National Academy Press, 673 p
43 U. S. Census Bureau (2011). “2010 Resident Population Data”. U. S. Census Bureau. Retrieved 26 December 2010.
44 USGS (2004). Lanslides Types and Processes, Fact Sheet 2004–3072, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2004/3072/fs-2004-3072.html (accessed on <day>10</day><month>September</month>2014)
45 van Westen C J, Rengers N, Terlien M T J, Soeters R. (1997). Prediction of the occurrence of slope instability phenomena through GIS-based hazard zonation. Geol Rundsch, 86: 404–414
46 Wachal D J, Hudak P F (2000). Mapping landslide susceptibility in Travis County, Texas, USA. GeoJournal, 51(3): 245–253
doi: 10.1023/A:1017524604463
47 Leshchinsky B, Olsen M, Tanyu B F (2015). Contour connection method for automated identification and classification of landslide deposits. Journal of Computers and Geosciences, 74: 27–38
doi: 10.1191/0309133305pp462ra
Related articles from Frontiers Journals
[1] Xiangyu REN,Kai YANG,Yue CHE,Mingwei WANG,Lili ZHOU,Liqiao CHEN. Spatial and temporal assessment of the initial pattern of phytoplankton population in a newly built coastal reservoir[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2016, 10(3): 546-559.
[2] Liang WANG, Xiaodong ZHAO, Yongming SHEN. Coupling hydrodynamic models with GIS for storm surge simulation: application to the Yangtze Estuary and the Hangzhou Bay, China[J]. Front Earth Sci, 2012, 6(3): 261-275.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed