4.6 Article

Prediction of spatially explicit rainfall intensity-duration thresholds for post-fire debris-flow generation in the western United States

期刊

GEOMORPHOLOGY
卷 278, 期 -, 页码 149-162

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2016.10.019

关键词

Wildfire; Debris flow; Rainfall thresholds; Hazard assessment

资金

  1. U.S. Geological Survey Landslide Hazards Program
  2. Multi-Hazards Demonstration Project

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Early warning of post-fire debris-flow occurrence during intense rainfall has traditionally relied upon a library of regionally specific empirical rainfall intensity-duration thresholds. Development of this library and the calculation of rainfall intensity-duration thresholds often require several years of monitoring local rainfall and hydrologic response to rainstorms, a time-consuming approach where results are often only applicable to the specific region where data were collected. Here, we present a new, fully predictive approach that utilizes rainfall, hydrologic response, and readily available geospatial data to predict rainfall intensity-duration thresholds for debris-flow generation in recently burned locations in the western United States. Unlike the traditional approach to defining regional thresholds from historical data, the proposed methodology permits the direct calculation of rainfall intensity-duration thresholds for areas where no such data exist. The thresholds calculated by this method are demonstrated to provide predictions that are of similar accuracy, and in some cases outperform, previously published regional intensity-duration thresholds. The method also provides improved predictions of debris-flow likelihood, which can be incorporated into existing approaches for post-fire debris-flow hazard assessment. Our results also provide guidance for the operational expansion of post-fire debris-flow early warning systems in areas where empirically defined regional rainfall intensity-duration thresholds do not currently exist. Published by Elsevier B.V.

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

4.6
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