Advertisement

Volume estimation and evaluation of rotational landslides using multi-temporal aerial photographs in Çağlayan dam reservoir area, Turkey

  • Tümay Kadakci KocaEmail author
  • M. Yalcin Koca
Original Paper
  • 76 Downloads

Abstract

Four landslide scarps in Neogene sedimentary rocks were observed in the Çağlayan dam reservoir area. This study aims to (1) estimate the volume of landslide material that slid into the dam reservoir area within 59-year period and (2) evaluate the reactivations with respect to triggering and predisposing factors such as slope gradient, precipitation, fire, and seismic activity. In this context, field survey was combined with innovative use of multi-temporal historical aerial photographs. Various methods of photogrammetry were employed on four sets of stereo aerial photographs (1953, 1970, 1995, 2012) to identify the boundaries of landslides, to generate digital elevation models (DEMs) from which cross-sectional data and slope maps were extracted. Volumes of landslides were estimated based on height differences between successive DEMs. Spatial mismatch and height errors between successive DEMs were minimized by image to image coregistration and height adjustment, respectively. The height adjustment technique was reevaluated and it was suggested to choose 11 sub-areas independent from the size and location. It is also recommended that the accuracy of the landslide boundaries interpreted from aerial photographs should be cross-checked by overlapped cross-sections of successive years to estimate the volume more precisely. A total volume of 121.78 × 104 m3 material collapsed whereas the largest volume moved in the period between 1953 and 1970 which was linked to a seismic event. Unconsolidated debris and weak rock layers are expected to fail in relation to water level fluctuations in the dam lake. The volume of sliding material will contribute to siltation and shorten the operational life of Çağlayan dam.

Keywords

Aerial photograph Multi-temporal analyses Photogrammetry Rotational slide Volume estimation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The borehole data were provided from the General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works in Turkey. The aerial photographs were obtained from General Command of Mapping in Turkey. Precipitation, temperature, and earthquake records were derived from Turkish State Meteorological Service and Disaster & Emergency Management Authority Presidential of Earthquake Department, respectively. We would like to thank to Prof. Dr. Yusuf Kurucu for his assistance and contributions during the project and to the EMİ Group Information Technologies Corporation for collaboration in DEM generation from historical aerial photographs.

Funding information

This research was funded by Dokuz Eylül University under the project number 2012.KB.FEN.044.

References

  1. Amirahdi A, Pourhashami S, Karami M, Akbari E (2016) Modeling of landslide volume estimation. Open Geosci 8:360–370Google Scholar
  2. Ayoub F, Leprince S, Avouac J (2009) Co-registration and correlation of aerial photographs for ground deformation measurements. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens 64:551–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bai S, Wang J, Thiebes B, Cheng C, Yang Y (2013) Analysis of the relationship of landslide occurrence with rainfall: a case study of Wudu County, China. Arab J Geosci 7(4):1277–1285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blue Marble Geographics (2016) Global Mapper software version 18Google Scholar
  5. Cai F, Ugai K (2004) Numerical analysis of rainfall effects on slope stability. Int J Geomech 4(2):69–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen RF, Chang KJ, Angelier J, Chan YC, Deffontaines B, Lee CT, Lin ML (2006) Topographical changes revealed by high-resolution airborne LiDAR data: the 1999 Tsaoling landslide induced by the Chi-Chi earthquake. Eng Geol 88:160–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen Z, Zhang B, Han Y, Zuo Z, Zhang X (2014) Modeling accumulated volume of landslides using remote sensing and DTM data. Remote Sens 6:1514–1537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Coe J, Glancy P, Whitney J (1997) Volumetric analysis and hydrologic characterization of a modern debris flow near Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Geomorphology 20:11–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Corsini A, Borgatti L, Cervi F, Dahne A, Ronchetti F, Sterzai P (2009) Estimating mass-wasting processes in active earth slides-earth flows with time-series of high-resolution DTMs from photogrammetry and airborne LiDAR. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 9:433–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cruden DM, Varnes DJ (1996) Landslide types and processes. In: Turner AK, Schuster RL (eds) Landslides: investigation and mitigation. Transportation Research Board, Special Report No 247, 36–75Google Scholar
  11. De Bari C, Lapenna V, Perrone A, Puglisi C, Sdao F (2011) Digital photogrammetric analysis and electrical resistivity tomography for investigating the Picerno landslide (Basilicata region, southern Italy). Geomorphology 133:34–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. DeLong SB, Youberg AM, DeLong WM, Murphy BP (2018) Post-wildfire landscape change and erosional processes from repeat terrestrial lidar in a steep headwater catchment, Chiricahua Mountains, Arizona, USA. Geomorphology 300:13–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Du JC, Teng HC (2007) 3D laser scanning and GPS technology for landslides earthwork volume estimation. Autom Constr 16:657–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Duman TY, Çan T, Emre Ö (2011) 1/1.500.000 Turkey Landslide Inventory Map, General Directorate of Mineral Reserach and Exploration special publications series-27, Ankara, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  15. Emre Ö, Duman TY, Özalp S, Elmacı H, Olgun Ş, Şaroğlu F (2013) 1/1.250.000 Turkey Live Fault Map, General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration special publications series, Ankara, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  16. Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) (2015) ArcGIS software version 10.4.1Google Scholar
  17. Fuller JC, Riedler AR, Bell R, Marden M, Glade T (2016) Landslide-driven erosion and slope channel coupling in steep, forested terrain, Ruahine Ranges, New Zealand, 1946-2011. Catena 142:252–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gabet EJ (2003) Post-fire thin debris flows: sediment transport and numerical modelling. Earth Surf Process Landf 28:1341–1348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ghafoori M, Lashkaripour GR, Tarigh Azali S (2011) Investigation of the geological and geotechnical characteristics of Daroongar Dam, Northeast Iran. Geotech Geol Eng 29:961–975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Guzzetti F, Ardizzone F, Cardinali M, Galli M, Rossi M, Valigi D (2009) Landslide volumes and landslide mobilization rates in Umbria, Central Italy. Earth Planet Sci Lett 279:222–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Guzzetti F, Mondini AC, Cardinali M, Fiorucci F, Santangelo M, Chang KT (2012) Landslide inventory maps: new tools for an old problem. Earth Sci Rev 112:42–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hack R, Alkema D, Kruse GAM, Leenders N, Luzi L (2007) Influence of earthquakes on the stability of slopes. Eng Geol 91(1):4–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hakyemez HY, Göktaş F, Erkal T (2013) Quaternary geology and evolution of the Gediz graben. Geol Bull Turkey 56(2):1–26 (in Turkish)Google Scholar
  24. Huang Y, Yu M, Xu Q, Sawada K, Moriguchi S, Yashima A, Liu C, Xue L (2015) InSAR-derived digital elevation models for terrain change analysis of earthquake-triggered flow-like landslides based on ALOS/PALSAR imagery. Environ Earth Sci 73(11):7661–7668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. IAEG Commission on Landslides (1990) Suggested nomenclature for landslides. Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol 41(1):13–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Inpho (2009) Inpho GmbH Match-T DSM software version 5.2Google Scholar
  27. ISRM (2007) The complete ISRM suggested methods for rock characterization, testing and monitoring: 1974–2006. In: Ulusay R, Hudson JA (eds) Suggested methods prepared by the Commission on Testing Methods, ISRM, Compilation arranged by the ISRM Turkish National Group, Kozan Ofset, AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  28. Lacroix P, Berthier E, Maquerhua ET (2015) Earthquake-driven acceleration of slow-moving landslides in the Colca valley, Peru, detected from Pléiades images. Remote Sens Environ 165:148–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Larsen IJ, Montgomery DR, Korup O (2010) Landslide erosion controlled by hillslope material. Nat Geosci 3:247–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lu L, Wang ZJ, Song ML, Arai K (2015) Stability analysis of slopes with ground water during earthquakes. Eng Geol 193:288–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Malamud BD, Turcotte DL, Guzzetti F, Reichenbach P (2004) Landslides, earthquakes, and erosion. Earth Planet Sci Lett 229:45–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mantovani F, Soeters R, Van Westen CJ (1996) Remote sensing techniques for landslide studies and hazard zonation in Europe. Geomorphology 15:213–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Marchesini I, Cencetti C, De Rosa P (2009) A preliminary method for the evaluation of the landslides volume at a regional scale. Geoinformatica 13(3):277–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Martinović K, Gavin K, Reale C, Mangan C (2018) Rainfall thresholds as a landslide indicator for engineered slopes on the Irish Rail network. Geomorphology 306:40–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Metternicht G, Hurni L, Gogu R (2005) Remote sensing of landslides: an analysis of the potential contribution to geo-spatial systems for hazard assessment in mountainous environments. Remote Sens Environ 98:284–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nikolaeva E, Walter TR, Shirzaei M, Zschau J (2014) Landslide observation and volume estimation in Central Georgia based on L-band InSAR. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 14:675–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Özkaymak Ç, Sözbilir H, Uzel B (2013) Neogene-Quaternary evolution of the Manisa Basin: evidence for variation in the stress pattern of the İzmir-Balıkesir Transfer Zone, western Anatolia. J Geodyn 65:117–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. PCI Geomatics (2012) PCI Geomatica software version 12.0.1Google Scholar
  39. Riestenberg MM, Sovonick-Dunford S (1983) The role of woody vegetation in stabilizing slopes in the Cincinnati area, Ohio. Geol Soc Am Bull 94(4):506–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rocscience Inc. (2010) Dips v.6.0. Graphical and statistical analysis of orientation dataGoogle Scholar
  41. Secci R, Calcina SV, Ranieri G, Uras G (2014) Analysis of the stability variation of a slope crossed by forest fire. Int J Civ Eng 3(1):41–50Google Scholar
  42. Singhroy V (2002) Landslide hazards: CEOS, the use of earth observing satellites for hazard support: assessments and scenarios. Final report of the CEOS Disaster Management Support Group, NOAA, pp 98Google Scholar
  43. Thornthwaite CW (1948) An approach toward a rational classification of climate. Geogr Rev 38(1):55–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tsutsui K, Rokugawa S, Nakagawa H, Miyazaki S, Cheng C, Shiraishi T, Yang S (2007) Detection and volume estimation of large-scale landslides based on elevation-change analysis using DEMs extracted from high-resolution satellite stereo imagery. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 45(6):1681–1696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ulusay R, Tuncay E, Sönmez H, Gökçeoğlu C (2004) An attenuation relationship based on Turkish strong motion data and iso-acceleration map of Turkey. Eng Geol 74:265–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Van Westen C, Getahun F (2003) Analyzing the evolution of the Tessina landslide using aerial photographs and digital elevation models. Geomorphology 54:77–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Vardon PJ (2015) Climatic influence on geotechnical infrastructure: a review. Environ Geotech 2(3):166–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wang B, Vardon PJ, Hicks MA (2018) Rainfall-induced slope collapse with coupled material point method. Eng Geol 239:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Yu M, Huang Y, Xu Q, Guo P, Dai Z (2016) Application of virtual earth in 3D terrain modeling to visual analysis of large-scale geological disasters in mountainous areas. Environ Earth Sci 75(7):1–7Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Geological Engineering Department, Engineering FacultyDokuz Eylul UniversityIzmirTurkey

Personalised recommendations