Enhanced Rainfall‐Induced Shallow Landslide Activity Following Seismic Disturbance—From Triggering to Healing

Leshchinsky, Ben; Lehmann, Peter; Or, Dani

doi:10.1029/2020jf005669

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 73 publications

(132 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In order to to model the hydro-logical process in the context of in the rainfall-induced landslides, Lehmann and Or (2012) combined the soil hydrologic parameterization of Brooks and Corey (1964) with the formulation for unsaturated soil strength by Lu et al (2010). This model performs well in the hydro-mechanical triggering model framework, and it has been applied in several studies (von Ruette et al, 2013;Fan et al, 2016;Leshchinsky et al, 2021). We have also adopted this hydromechanical model into the modelling framework for co-seismic landslides.…”

Section: Hydrologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling Earthquake-induced Landslide initiation using the Fibre Bundle Model

Chen¹,

Bout²,

Lombardo³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Co-seismic landslides are triggered by strong ground shaking in mountainous areas, resulting in threats to human activity and infrastructure. Methods for physically-based modelling of co-seismic landslide triggering play an important role in disaster prevention and mitigation. Current approaches, however, focus on direct and full failure of sloping rocks and soils,and do not cover the dynamics of partial damage and post-earthquake stability. In order to specify the seismic effect and simulate the dynamic failure process, we propose the use of Fibre Bundle Model (FBM), a mathematical framework to simulate the highly nonlinear behaviour of the progressive damage and breakdown of disordered media statistically. Soil on slopes are considered as bundles of fibres with a certain strength probability distribution. The damage in soil structure gradually increment during ground shaking. Our approach, integrating seismic forcing into the method, allows for prediction of partial damage, as well as full failure. We reach good validation results (AUC of 0.78). Due to the underlyingprinciples, the partial damage can be interpreted as a deterministic partial damage, or as a proxy for failure probability. The partial damage could be critical in predicting the impact of post-seismic landslide effects.

show abstract

Section: Hydrologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling Earthquake-induced Landslide initiation using the Fibre Bundle Model

Chen¹,

Bout²,

Lombardo³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Earthquakes have long been recognized as one of the primary triggers for landslides in certain parts of the world (Keefer, 1984; Keefer & Manson, 1998; Leshchinsky et al., 2021; Zhao et al., 2023). These earthquake‐induced landslides can occur either simultaneously with the earthquake or within a certain period following the event.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Distribution Pattern of Ground Movement and Co‐Seismic Landslides: A Case Study of the 5 September 2022 Luding Earthquake, China

Li,

Wu,

Gao

et al. 2024

JGR Earth Surface

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Major earthquakes can cause extensive landsliding that poses a major threat to both property and human lives. In addition to co‐seismically triggered ground failure, the earthquake‐affected region remains vulnerable to landslides due to loosened and unstable materials and structures. Many researchers have studied landslide distributions and their controlling factors after earthquakes, but the function of ground motion is unclear. To investigate the connection in a strike‐slip earthquake, we analyzed the 5 September 2022 Luding earthquake (Mw 6.6) in Sichuan Province, China. We interpreted remote‐sensing images to obtain the landslide distribution before and after the earthquake, calculated surface deformation from D‐InSAR data (pre‐ and post‐earthquake), utilized a point‐source model for the focal mechanism inversion, and then constructed a finite fault model for the rupture slip. There are clear differences in the landslide distributions on the two sides of the fault before and after the earthquake. The density of co‐seismic landslides on the west side of the fault exceeded that on the east side. The patterns of surface deformation and ground motion indicated that the areas with larger deformation and motion were associated with more landslides. Furthermore, the landslide size decreased with distance from the fault. A new finding is that co‐seismic landslides induced by strike‐slip earthquakes result in high landslide concentration on both sides of the fault, while previous studies find that co‐seismic landslides triggered by thrust earthquakes present a hanging wall concentrated distribution pattern. These findings contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the connection between ground movement patterns and landslide distributions.

show abstract

“…The mechanisms responsible for this temporal pattern are poorly constrained (Rosser et al., 2021). Transient, elevated (i.e., above rainfall‐normalized baseline conditions) rates of post‐seismic landsliding are not ostensibly controlled by external seismic or meteorological forcing (Marc et al., 2015) and have instead been attributed to a combination of erosion of regolith weakened by earthquake ground shaking (Fan et al., 2018; Kincey et al., 2021; Lin et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2015), and/or recovery of hillslope strength in the post‐seismic phase following initial disturbance and weakening during ground shaking (Leshchinsky et al., 2020; Marc et al., 2015, 2021). The mechanisms responsible for the latter are poorly constrained but have been postulated to result from a range of “healing” processes that include the re‐establishment of plant‐root cohesion (e.g., Jacoby, 1997; Yunus et al., 2020) and the reversal of dilation experienced during an earthquake as rock and soil masses settle and re‐establish frictional contacts (e.g., Lawrence et al., 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Controls on Post‐Seismic Landslide Behavior in Brittle Rocks

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We used novel geotechnical testing to explore mechanisms that control post-seismic hillslope strength and rheology in brittle rocks. The amplitude of dynamic loading can govern the nature of fractures and asperities formed, affecting subsequent shear strength and rheology. The shear deformation mechanism mobilised determines whether post-seismic shear strength increases, decreases or remains unchanged.

show abstract

Enhanced Rainfall‐Induced Shallow Landslide Activity Following Seismic Disturbance—From Triggering to Healing

Abstract: Earthquakes are important drivers of ground failure in certain parts of the world, often inducing significant landsliding during shaking. After an earthquake occurs, landslide activity remains elevated (Dad

Cited by 8 publications

References 73 publications

Modeling Earthquake-induced Landslide initiation using the Fibre Bundle Model

Modeling Earthquake-induced Landslide initiation using the Fibre Bundle Model

The Distribution Pattern of Ground Movement and Co‐Seismic Landslides: A Case Study of the 5 September 2022 Luding Earthquake, China

Controls on Post‐Seismic Landslide Behavior in Brittle Rocks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About