Advertisement

Contemporary Approaches to Natural Disaster Risk Management in Geotechnics

Chapter
  • 220 Downloads
Part of the Springer Tracts in Civil Engineering book series (SPRTRCIENG)

Abstract

Geodynamic natural phenomena, such as landslides and earthquakes, are among the most hazardous natural threats to human lives and property. Usual landslide triggers are floods and heavy rainfall, in which case speed of onset is mostly rapid and damage to structures and systems can be severe (buildings may be buried or villages swept away). In addition, transportation networks, with embankment and cutting slopes, retaining structures, bridges, and tunnels as their integral parts, are considered to be of paramount importance when the risk under strong earthquakes is considered, since accessibility of roads affects the speed and the scope of the emergency measures to be provided in the very immediate post-earthquake emergency and relief operations, and since the earthquake-induced damages to the infrastructures could severely affect the economy of a region due to the time required to restore the functionality of the network. Prevention measures and activities are the best mean of protection of human lives and social goods. Natural disaster prevention arrangements are of long-term character with permanent governmental and professional activity for the needs of establishment of consistent scientific bases and their practical application in prevention and mitigation of disaster risk. In this respect, the contemporary tools in prevention of landslide occurrence, as well as in reduction of seismic risk for foundation structures and, in particular, for tunnel structures as crucial elements in transportation network, are presented in this chapter, with a special emphasis on the state-of-the-art hazard analysis, geotechnical and construction strategies of prevention and mitigation of adverse natural hazard effects, as well as on development of monitoring and early-warning systems.

Keywords

Landslides Earthquakes Foundations Tunnels Risk management Hazard analysis Prevention Mitigation Early-warning system 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the Erasmus+ Project “Development of master curricula for natural disasters risk management in Western Balkan countries—NatRisk” 573806-EPP-1-2016-1-RS-EPPKA2-CBHE-JP (2016–2019), and the support of the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia in the frame of the scientific–research project “Development and improvement of methods for analysis of the soil–structure interaction based on theoretical and experimental research” TR36028 (2011–2019).

References

  1. Abolmasov, B., Marjanović, M., Djurić, U., Stanković, R., Krušić, J., Andrejev, K., Vulović, N., & Petrović, R. (2015). BEWARE Project Brochure—Project guide and handbook for practical work. United Nations Development Program (UNDP), Serbia. http://geoliss.mre.gov.rs/beware.
  2. Aбpaмчyк, B., Пeдчик, A., Шипицын, B., Maкcимoв, A., Якoвлeв, Ю., & Maлинин, A. (2004). Укpeплeниe зoны плacтичныx глин пpи cтpoитeльcтвe aвтoдopoжнoгo тoннeля в Уфe. Meтpo и тoннeли, 4. www.jet-grouting.ru.
  3. Bairaktaris, D., Frondistou-Yannas, S., Kalles, D., Stathaki, A., Kallidromitis, V., Kotrotsios, G., Negro, P., & Colombo. A. (2000). Intelligent monitoring of seismic damage in reinforced concrete tunnel linings. OECD-Nuclear Energy Agency Workshop on the Instrumentation and Monitoring of Concrete Structures, Brussels, Belgium. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.2.2193&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
  4. Bommer, J. J., Bird, J. F., & Crowley, H. (2006). Earthquake losses due to ground failure (liquefaction and landslides). In 1st European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  5. Bonić, Z., Davidović, N. M., Prolović, V., Lukić, D. Č., & Vacev, T. N. (2012). Experimental investigation of punching shear failure of column footings. Technics Technologies Education Management (TTEM), 7(4), 1499–1507.Google Scholar
  6. Bonić, Z., Davidović, N., Prolović, V., Zlatanović, E., & Romić, N. (2015a). New technological procedure for construction of reinforced concrete diaphragms in a cohesive soil. Technical solution, Project of the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia “Development and improvement of methods for analysis of the soil–structure interaction based on theoretical and experimental research” TR36028 (2011–2019). Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, University of Niš, Niš, Serbia (in Serbian).Google Scholar
  7. Bonić, Z., Davidović, N., Vacev, T., Romić, N., Zlatanović, E., & Savić, J. (2017). Punching behaviour of reinforced concrete footings at testing and according to Eurocode 2 and fib model code 2010. International Journal of Concrete Structures and Materials, 11(4), 657–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bonić, Z., & Folić, R. J. (2013). Punching of column footings—Comparison of experimental and calculation results. Gradjevinar, 65(10), 887–899.Google Scholar
  9. Bonić, Z., Prolović, V., & Mladenović, B. (2010a). Mathematical modeling of materially nonlinear problems in structural analyses (Part I—Theoretical fundamentals). Facta Universitatis, Series: Architecture and Civil Engineering, 8(1), 67–78.Google Scholar
  10. Bonić, Z., Prolović, V., Romić, N., Davidović, N., & Zlatanović, E. (2015b). Comparative analysis of design methods of transversally loaded diaphragms. Facta Universitatis, Series: Architecture and Civil Engineering, 13(3), 233–243.Google Scholar
  11. Bonić, Z., Vacev, T., Prolović, V., Mijalković, M., & Dančević, P. (2010b). Mathematical modeling of materially nonlinear problems in structural analyses (part II—application in contemporary software). Facta Universitatis, Series: Architecture and Civil Engineering, 8(2), 201–210.Google Scholar
  12. Chunxia, H., Hongru, Z., Guoxing, C., & Zhilong, S. (2008). Design and performance of a large scale soil laminar shear box in shaking table test. In 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China.Google Scholar
  13. Dash, U., Lee, T., & Anderson, R. (2003). Jet grouting experience at Posey Webster Street Tubes Seismic Retrofit Project. In 3rd International Conference Grouting and Ground Treatment.Google Scholar
  14. Davidović, N., Bonić, Z., Prolović, V., & Spasojević-Šurdilović, M. (2012a). Analysis of the possibility of using separated river gravel 16/32 mm for the construction of regional sanitary landfill “Gigoš” near Jagodina. In 4th International Conference Civil EngineeringScience and Practice, Žabljak, Montenegro, 1977–1984.Google Scholar
  15. Davidović, N., Bonić, Z., Prolović, V., Zlatanović, E., & Romić, N. (2014). Analysis of the stability of embankment of rock material obtained by blasting, on Highway E-80 Niš–Dimitrovgrad, Section 4 Čiflik–Staničenje. In 5th International Conference Civil Engineering—Science and Practice, Žabljak, Montenegro (pp. 1805–1812).Google Scholar
  16. Davidović, N., Bonić, Z., Prolović, V., Zlatanović, E., & Romić, N. (2015). Comparative deterministic–probabilistic computational analysis of the soil bearing capacity at site “Grošnica” in Kragujevac. In 6th ScientificTechnical Conference Geotechnical Aspects of Construction, Vršac, Serbia, 201–208 (in Serbian).Google Scholar
  17. Davidović, N., Bonić, Z., Prolović, V., Zlatanović, E., & Romić, N. (2017). Stabilization of slopes on the E-75 highway, section: Gornje Polje–Caričina Dolina—retaining structure on micropiles. In 7th ScientificTechnical Conference Geotechnical Aspects of Construction, Šabac, Serbia (pp. 299–306) (in Serbian).Google Scholar
  18. Davidović, N., Prolović, V., & Lukić, D. (2012b). Consideration of variability of soil parameters in probabilistic soil modeling. In 12th International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference SGEM 2012, Albena, Bulgaria (Vol. 2, pp. 39–46).Google Scholar
  19. Hashash, Y. M. A., Hook, J. J., Schmidt, B., & Yao, J. I.-C. (2001). Seismic design and analysis of underground structures. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 16, 247–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hasheminejad, S. M., & Miri, A. K. (2008). Seismic isolation effect of lined circular tunnels with damping treatments. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 7(3), 305–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hayward Baker Inc. (2004). Jet grouting. Brochure. www.HaywardBaker.com.
  22. Johansson, J., & Konagai, K. (2007). Fault induced permanent ground deformations: experimental verification of wet and dry soil, numerical findings’ relation to field observations of tunnel damage and implications for design. Soil Dynamics and Eartquake Engineering, 27, 938–956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Keshvarian, K., Chenaghlou, M. R., Tabrizi, M. E., & Vahdani, S. (2004). Seismic isolation of tunnel lining—A case study of the Gavoshan Tunnel in the Movarid Fault. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 19, 517 (H19 1–8).Google Scholar
  24. Kim, D. S., & Konagai, K. (2001). Seismic isolation effect of a tunnel covered with coating material. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 15(4), 437–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Krušić, J., Andrejev, K., Kitanović, O., & Vulović, N. (2015). Application of the multi-criteria methods for production of the landslide hazard map of the municipality of Krupanj. Seminar GIS Day, Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia (http://geoliss.mre.gov.rs/beware/presentation/poster.pdf).
  26. Lanzano, G., Bilotta, E., & Russo, G. (2008). Tunnels under seismic loading: a review of damage case histories and protection methods. In G. Fabbrocino & F. Santucci de Magistris (Eds.), Strategies for reduction of the seismic risk (pp. 65–74).Google Scholar
  27. Marjanović, M., Abolmasov, B., Djurić, U., & Bogdanović, S. (2013). Impact of geo-environmental factors on landslide susceptibility using an AHP method: A case study of Fruška Gora Mt., Serbia. Annales Geologiques De La Peninsule Balkanique, 74, 91–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Milutinović, Z. (2006). Management of disaster risk. Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Seismology, Skopje, Republic of Macedonia.Google Scholar
  29. Mizuno, K., Koizumi, A. (2006). Dynamic behavior of shield tunnels in the transverse direction considering the effects of secondary lining. In 1st European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  30. Popović, B. (1987). Tunnels. Gradjevinska knjiga, Belgrade, Serbia (in Serbian).Google Scholar
  31. Prolović, V., Bonić, Z., Davidović, N., & Romić, N. (2011). Analysis of causes of landslide occurrence at the location Pivarski park in Kragujevac and remediation action proposal. In 4th ScientificTechnical Conference Geotechnical Aspects of Construction, Zlatibor, Serbia (pp. 335–342) (in Serbian).Google Scholar
  32. Protić, M., Bonić, Z. (2018). Early warning and hazard analysis system in Republic of Serbia. In 9th GRACM International Congress on Computational Mechanics, Chania, Greece (pp. 181–188).Google Scholar
  33. ROTEX OY. (2006). Forepoling in tunnels. Prospectus www.rotex.fi.
  34. Suzuki, H., Tokimatsu, K., Sato, M., & Tabata, K. (2008). Soil–pile–structure interaction in liquefiable ground through multi-dimensional shaking table tests using E-defense facility. In 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China.Google Scholar
  35. Vacev, T. N., Bonić, Z., Prolović, V., Davidović, N. M., & Lukić, D. Č. (2015). Testing and finite element analysis of reinforced concrete column footings failing by punching shear. Engineering Structures, 92, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wallace, J., Kang, T. H.-K., & Robertson, I. (ND). Slab–column frames. Presentation to EERI, University of California, Los Angeles. https://apps.peer.berkeley.edu/grandchallenge/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Wallace-lab_Column_Final_V3_Present_Handout.pdf.
  37. Zlatanović, E., Broćeta, G., & Popović-Miletić, N. (2013). Numerical modelling in seismic analysis of tunnels regarding soil–structure interaction. Facta Universitatis, Series: Architecture and Civil Engineering, 11(3), 251–267.Google Scholar
  38. Zlatanović, E., Lukić, D. Č., Prolović, V., Bonić, Z., & Davidović, N. (2015). Comparative study on earthquake-induced soil–tunnel structure interaction effects under good and poor soil conditions. European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering, 19(8), 1000–1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zlatanović, E., Lukić, D., & Šešov, V. (2014). Presentation of analytical solutions for seismically induced tunnel lining forces accounting for soil–structure interaction effects. Building Materials and Structures (Gradjevinski materijali i konstrukcije), 57(1), 3–28.Google Scholar
  40. Zlatanović, E., Šešov, V., Lukić, D. Č., Prokić, A., & Trajković-Milenković, M. (2017). Tunnel–ground interaction analysis: discrete beam–spring vs. continuous FE model. Technical Gazette, 24(Supplement 1), 61–69.Google Scholar
  41. Zlatanović, E., Trajković-Milenković, M., Lukić, D. Č., Brčić, S., & Šešov, V. (2016). A comparison of linear and nonlinear seismic tunnel–ground interaction analyses. Acta Geotechnica Slovenica, 13(2), 27–42.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture of NišUniversity of NišNišSerbia

Personalised recommendations