4.7 Article

Landslide hazard assessment using analytic hierarchy process (AHP): A case study of National Highway 5 in India

Journal

AIN SHAMS ENGINEERING JOURNAL
Volume 13, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.asej.2021.10.021

Keywords

Landslide hazard zonation; Weighted linear combination (WLC); Analytic hierarchy process (AHP); Landslide susceptibility

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study utilizes the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) model to create a landslide hazard map along national highway 5, taking into account multiple factors such as slope, geology, and distance from the road. The results of the study, validated by landslide inventory and prediction accuracy analysis, can be used by construction planners and decision makers.
Slope failure along highways is a crucial problem in hilly regions. Landslide hazard maps are very efficient and effective tools for planning and management of landslide disasters. Aim of this study is to prepare a landslide hazard map along national highway 5 (197.600-283.200 Km) using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) model. The different causative factors of landslides considered in this study are slope, aspect, curvature, relative relief, fault density, drainage density, geology, topographic wetness index (TWI), distance from road and lithology. The causative factors are divided into sub-factors and weightage are assigned according to analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The causative factor layers are overlaid using weighted linear combination (WLC) technique and a landslide hazard map is prepared. A landslide inventory of 215 landslides is used for validation of the landslide hazard map. The map shows a prediction rate of 0.825 on area under curve (AUC) technique. The study can be used by the construction planners and decision makers. (C) 2021 THE AUTHORS. Published by Elsevier BV on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams University.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available