Advertisement

Velocity Prediction on Time-Variant Landslides Using Moving Response Functions: Application to La Barmasse Rockslide (Valais, Switzerland)

  • Antonio AbellánEmail author
  • Clément Michoud
  • Michel Jaboyedoff
  • François Baillifard
  • Jonathan Demierre
  • Dario Carrea
  • Marc-Henri Derron
Conference paper

Abstract

Landslides are complex natural systems with non-linear and time variant response to a given input rainfall rate. Although landslide response (e.g. rate of displacement) is normally assumed uniform along time for a constant input (e.g. rainfall rate), we show how the use of adaptive moving windows for parameter’s calibration may lead to a better prediction of the displacement rates. The model is based on the computation of the displacement rates at each time lapse (e.g. one day) as a convolution of a given response function times daily rainfall. The response function was deduced from physically based infiltration laws, being the values of their parameters optimized in order to minimize the error between the real observations and the modeled velocities. The model was then applied to a long-term landslide deformation time series at La Barmasse landslide (Valais, Switzerland). Model performance was significantly improved using moving windows, showing the modeled rates of displacements close resemblance to real observations.

Keywords

Landslide Velocity Prediction Response function Variant system 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the Bagnes municipality (Valais, Switzerland) for sharing extensometric data of La Barmasse landslide. The present work has been supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (project numbers 138015 and 144040).

References

  1. Abellan A, Michoud C, Demierre J, Jaboyedoff M (2012) Velocity calculation from daily rainfall data (Barmasse Landslide). Internal reportGoogle Scholar
  2. Abellan A, Moya J, Jaboyedoff M, Corominas J (2013) The Vallcebre landslide: predicting landslide velocities from rainfall data (in spanish). In: VIII Spanish symposium on landslides and slope stability. Palma de Mallorca, Spain, pp 1081–1092Google Scholar
  3. Belle P, Aunay B, Bernardie S, Grandjean G, Ladouche Bernard, Mazué R, Join J-L (2013) The application of an innovative inverse model for understanding and predicting landslide movements (Salazie cirque landslides, Reunion Island) Landslides, 1–13Google Scholar
  4. Bernardie S, Desramaut N, Azib M, Grandjean G, Malet J-P (2013) Prediction of changes in landslide rates induced by rainfall. In: Conference proceedings, Journées Aléas Gravitaires, Grenoble, France, 17–18 Sept 2013Google Scholar
  5. Capparelli G, Versace P (2011) FLaIR and SUSHI: two mathematical models for early warning of landslides induced by rainfall. Landslides 8(1):67–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Corominas J, Moya J, Ledesma A, Lloret A, Gili JA (2005) Prediction of ground displacements and velocities from groundwater level changes at the Vallcebre landslide (Eastern Pyrenees, Spain). Landslides 2:83–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Crosta GB, Frattini P, di Prisco C (2012) Approaches to rainfall-induced landslides forecasting. Invited lecture. In: Eberhardt E et al (eds) Landslides and engineered slopes, proceedings of 11th international and 2nd North American Symposium on landslides and engineered slopes, Banff, Canada, vol 1. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, London, pp 15–22Google Scholar
  8. Guzzetti F, Peruccacci S, Rossi M, Stark CP (2008) The rainfall intensity–duration control of shallow landslides and debris flows: an update. Landslides 5(1):3–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Horton RE (1933) The role of infiltration in the hydrologic cycle. Trans Am Geophys Union 14:446–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Iverson RM (2000) Landslide triggering by rain infiltration, Water Resour Res 36:1897-1910 Google Scholar
  11. Jaboyedoff M, Derron M-H, Jakubowski J, Oppikofer T, Pedrazzini A (2012) The 2006 Eiger rockslide, European Alps. In: Stead D, Clague JJ (eds) Landslides: types, mechanisms and modelling. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 282–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kostiakov AN (1932) On the dynamics of the coefficient of water-percolation in soils and on the necessity for studying it from a dynamic point of view for purposes of amelioration. In: Transactions Congress international society for soil science, 6th, Moscow, Part A, pp 17–21Google Scholar
  13. Malet J-P, van Asch ThWJ, van Beek R, Maquaire O (2005) Forecasting the behaviour of complex landslides with a spatially distributed hydrological model. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 5:71–85. doi: 10.5194/nhess-5-71-2005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Michoud C, Abellan A, Baillifard FJ, Demierre J, Derron MH, Jaboyedoff M, Jakubowski J, May-Delasoie F (2012) The structurally-controlled rockslide of Barmasse (Valais, Switzerland): structural geology, ground-based monitoring and displacement versus rainfall modeling. In: EGU general assembly conference abstracts, vol 14, p 2914Google Scholar
  15. Michoud C, Baillifard F-J, Derron M-H, Jaboyedoff M (2013) Active terrestrial remote sensing techniques to monitor and model the rockslide of La Barmasse (Valais, Switzerland). Internal reportGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antonio Abellán
    • 1
    Email author
  • Clément Michoud
    • 1
  • Michel Jaboyedoff
    • 1
  • François Baillifard
    • 2
  • Jonathan Demierre
    • 3
  • Dario Carrea
    • 1
  • Marc-Henri Derron
    • 1
  1. 1.Risk Analysis Group. Institute of Earth Sciences (ISTE), Faculty of Geosciences and EnvironmentUniversity of Lausanne, GeopolisLausanneSwitzerland
  2. 2.Security ServiceBagnes Municipality ServiceLe ChâbleSwitzerland
  3. 3.Department of Mechanical Engineering, The Earth InstituteColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations