4.7 Article

An integrated geological, geotechnical and geophysical approach to identify predisposing factors for flowslide occurrence

期刊

ENGINEERING GEOLOGY
卷 267, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2019.105473

关键词

Flowslides; Geological models; Geotechnical parameters; Geophysical prospecting; Landslide hazard assessment; Pyroclastic soil

资金

  1. METROPOLIS (PON 'Ricerca e Competilivita 2007-2013') [PONO3PE_00093_4]
  2. TERRE H2020 MSCA ITN 2015 (H2020 Training Engineers and Researchers to Rethink geotechnical Engineering for a low carbon future) [675762]
  3. Italian National Agency for the Evaluation of Universities and Research Institutes (ANVUR), Rome, Italy [E61I18001660005]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study combines geological, geotechnical and geophysical analyses to construct a 3D model of the subsoil, based on a significant amount of data collected at a test site in the Lattari mountain range in southern Italy. Several investigation techniques were applied to study the spatial variability of the local stratigraphic setting and relevant geophysical and geotechnical parameters at the slope scale. By integrating field and laboratory measurements, such as geological logs, soil sampling, 2D and 3D electrical resistivity tomography surveys, time domain reflectometry profiles and characteristic curves of electrical resistivity vs saturation degree, the continuous stratigraphy of the pyroclastic cover in question was reconstructed and 3D models of effective saturation degree in different pyroclastic horizons were retrieved. As the proposed procedure is applied to study flowslide initiation, the test site was implemented on a 32 degrees slope affected by historical flowslides. The following factors predisposing to flowslides were identified: steep stratigraphic contact between shallower soils and bedrock, impermeable layers that buffer the draining of the fractured limestone, preferential rainwater infiltration paths, and spatial distribution of water content in the soil.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据