Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Application and comparison of shallow landslide susceptibility models in weathered granite soil under extreme rainfall events

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Environmental Earth Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Landslide susceptibility maps are important for risk management and land-use planning in mountainous countries such as Korea. Many of the slopes of the mountainous areas of Korea are composed of residual soils that originate from weathering of the granite bedrock. The purpose of this study was to compare the application of the SHALSTAB and SINMAP models to slope stability evaluation in Deokjeok-ri Creek. The SINMAP and SHALSTAB models are terrain stability models that are based on a steady-state hydrologic model coupled with an infinite-slope stability equation. A digital elevation model based on LIDAR data was used to calculate the slope and wetness indices. In situ and laboratory tests were performed to find the geotechnical parameters. A geographic information system-based landslide inventory map of 748 landslide locations was prepared using data from previous reports, aerial photographs, and extensive field work. This inventory of landslide scars was used to document sites of instability and to provide an evaluation of model performance by comparing the observed landslide locations with predictions from the models. Both SHALSTAB and SINMAP models identified the northern part of the catchment as the most unstable area. Receiver operator curve plots were used to show that the susceptibility maps produced using SHALSTAB had better prediction accuracy (82.4 %) than the SINMAP model (62.58 %) had. It is concluded that SHALSTAB was relatively successful in delineating slopes where shallow landslides have been observed previously. SHALSTAB is therefore more applicable to weathered granite soil.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bai SB, Wang J, LÜ GN, Zhou PG, Hou SS, Xu SN (2009) GIS based and data-driven bivariate landslide-susceptibility mapping in the three gorges area. Pedospher 19:14–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baum RL, Godt JW (2010) Early warning of rainfall-induced shallow landslides and debris flow in the USA. Landslides 7:259–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beven KJ, Kirkby MJ (1979) A physically based variable contributing area model of catchment hydrology. Hydrol Sci Bull 24:43–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calvello M, Lasco M, Vassallo R, Di Maio C (2005) Compressibility and residual shear strength of smectitic clays: influence of pore aqueous solutions and organic solvents. Ital Geotech J 1:34–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrara A, Cardinali M, Detti R, Guzzetti F, Pasqui V, Reichenback P (1991) GIS techniques and statistical models in evaluating landslide hazard. Earth Surf Process Landf 16:427–445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cervi F, Berti M, Borgatti L, Ronchetti F, Corsini A (2010) Comparing predictive capability of statistical and deterministic methods for landslides susceptibility mapping: a case study in the northern Apennines (Reggio Emilia Province, Italy). Landslides 7:433–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choough SK, Kwon ST, Ree JH, Choi DK (2000) Tectonic and sedimentary evolution of the Korean peninsula: a review and new view. Earth Sci Rev 52:175–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung YS, Yoon MB, Kim HS (2004) On climate variations and changes observed in South Korea. Clim Change 66:151–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark GM (1987) Debris Slide and debris flow historical events in the Appalachians south of the glacial border, in JE Costa and GF Wieczorek., eds, Debris flows/avalanches: process, recognition, and mitigation. Geol Soc Am Rev Eng Geol 7:125–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crozier MJ (1986) Landslides: causes consequences and environment. Croom Helm, London, p 252

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietrich WE, Montgomery DR (1998) SHALSTAB: a digital terrain model for mapping shallow landslide potential. http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~geomorph/shalstab/

  • Dietrich WE, Bellugi D, Real De Asua R (2001) Validation of the shallow landslide model, SHALSTAB, for forest management, In: Wigmosta MS, Burges SJ (eds.) Land use and watersheds: human influence on hydrology and geomorphology in urban and forest areas. Amer. Geoph. Union, Water Science and Application, 2:195–227

  • Einstein HH (1988) Special lecture: landslides risk assessment procedure. In: Proceedings of 5th Symposium on Landslides, Lausanne. 2:1075–1090

  • Guzzetti F, Reichenbach P, Cardinali M, Galli M, Ardizzone F (2005) Probabilistic landslide hazard assessment at the basin scale. Geomorphology 72:272–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammont C, Hall D, Miller S, Swetik P (1992) Level I stability analysis (LISA) documentation for Version 2.0. General Technical Report INT-285, USDA Forest Service Intermountain Research Station, p 190

  • Hanley JA, McNeil BJ (1982) The meaning and use of the area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 143:29–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosmer D, Lemeshow S (2000) Applied logistic regression, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York, 392 pp

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Iverson RM (2000) Landslide triggering by rain infiltration. Water Resour Res 36(7):1897–1910

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson JA (1997) Glossary of geology: Alexandria. American Geological Institute, VA 769 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwon Y, Oh S (2011) Physical and mechanical properties of decomposed granite soils sampled in Cheongju, Korea. Int J Phys Sci 6(24):5777–5794

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanni C, McDonnell JJ, Rigon R (2011) On the relative role of upslope and downslope topography for describing water flowpath and storage dynamics: a theoretical analysis. Hydrol Process 25:3909–3923

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanni C, McDonnell J, Hopp L, Rigon R (2012) Simulated effect of soil depth and bedrock topography on near-surface hydrologic response and slope stability. Earth Surf Proc Land 38(2):146–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu N, Godt JW (2008) Infinite-slope stability under steady unsaturated seepage conditions. Water Resour Res 44:W11404. doi:10.1029/2008WR006976

    Google Scholar 

  • Meisina C, Scarabelli S (2006) A comparative analysis of terrain stability models for predicting shallow landslides in colluvial soils. Geomorphology 87:207–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery DR, Dietrich WE (1994) A physically based model for the topographic control on shallow landsliding. Water Resour Res 30:1153–1171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrissey MM, Wieczorek GF, Morgan BA (2001) A comparative analysis of hazard models for predicting debris flows in Madison County, Virginia. USGS, Open-File Report 01–0067

  • O’Loughlin EM (1986) Prediction of surface saturation zones in natural catchments by topographic analysis. Water Resour Res 22(5):794–804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pack RT, Tarboton DG (2004) Stability index mapping (SINMAP) applied to the prediction of shallow translational landsliding. Geophys Res Abstr 6:05122

    Google Scholar 

  • Pack RT, Tarboton DG, and Goodwin CN (1998). The SINMAP approach to terrain stability mapping. In: Moore DP, Hungr O (eds.), 8th Congress of IAEG, Balkema, the Netherlands, 2: 1157–1165

  • Pack RT, Tarboton DG, Goodwin CN (1999) SINMAP–a stability index approach to terrain stability hazard mapping (user’s manual). Produced in ArcView avenue and C++ for forest renewal B.C. under Research Contract No. PA97537–0RE

  • Pack RT, Tarboton DG, Goodwin CN (2001) Assessing terrain stability in a GIS using SINMAP. Presented at the 15th annual GIS conference, GIS, February, 19–22, Vancouver, British Columbia

  • Picarelli L (2000) Mechanisms and rates of slope movements in fine grained soils. Eng Geol 1:1618–1670

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan AMS, Kim YT (2014) Relative effect method of landslide susceptibility zonation in weathered granite soil: a case study in Deokjeok-ri Creek, South Korea. Nat Hazard 72(2):1189–1217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seo KH, Lee LJ (2011) A white book of Changma. Korea Meteorological Administration, p 268

  • Shaw SC, Vaugeois LM (1999) Comparison of GIS based models of shallow landsliding for application to watershed management. TFW-PR 10-99-001, #118 Washington Department of Natural Resources, Olympia, WA p 114

  • Skempton AW, DeLory FA (1957) Stability of natural slopes in London clay. In: Proceedings 4th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, 2:378–381

  • Soeters R, van Westen CJ (1996) Slope instability recognition, analysis and zonation. In: Turner AK, Schuster RL (eds) Landslides Investigation and Mitigation. Transportation Research Board Special report, 247. National Academy Press, Washington DC

  • Summerfield MA (1997) Global geomorphology. Longman, New York, p 537

    Google Scholar 

  • Suzuki T, Tokunaga E, Noda H, Arakawa H (1985) Effects of rock strength and permeability on hill morphology. Trans Jpn Geomorphol Union 6:101–130

    Google Scholar 

  • Swets JA (1988) Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science 240:1285–1293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tarboton DG (1997) A new method for the determination of flow directions and contributing areas in grid digital elevation models. Water Resour Res 33(2):309–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner AK (1996). Colluvium and talus. In: Turner AK, Schuster RL (eds) Landslides investigation and mitigation. Special Report, 247:525–554

  • van Westen CJ (2004) Geo-information tools for landslide risk assessment: an overview of recent developments. In: Lacerda W, Erlich M, Fontoura SAB, Sayao ASF (eds) Landslides: evaluation and stabilization–glissement de terrain: evaluation et stabilisation. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on landslides, June 28–July 2, 2004, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Balkema, London. ISBN:978-0-415-35665-7

  • van Westen CJ, Rengers N, Soeters R (2003) Use of geomorphological information in indirect landslide susceptibility assessment. Nat Hazards 30:399–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Public Welfare and Safety Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF), funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT, and Future Planning (grant No. 2012M3A2A1050977), a grant (13SCIPS04) from Smart Civil Infrastructure Research Program funded by Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT) of Korea government and Korea Agency for Infrastructure Technology Advancement (KAIA) and the Brain Korea 21 Plus (BK 21 Plus).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yun-Tae Kim.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 4525 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pradhan, A.M.S., Kim, YT. Application and comparison of shallow landslide susceptibility models in weathered granite soil under extreme rainfall events. Environ Earth Sci 73, 5761–5771 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-014-3829-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-014-3829-x

Keywords

Navigation