Hydraulic Structures and Society - Engineering Challenges and Extremes 2014
DOI: 10.14264/uql.2014.48
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Human body stability in floodwaters: the 2011 flood in Brisbane CBD

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
36
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
36
0
Order By: Relevance
“…a dummy) for their experiments. The scaled human body strictly followed the principles of geometric, kinematic and dynamic scaling, which meant that the flow conditions were ideally similar to those in the prototype (Chanson 2004), e.g. density, drag and friction coefficient of the selected human body model were approximately equal to those of the prototype .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…a dummy) for their experiments. The scaled human body strictly followed the principles of geometric, kinematic and dynamic scaling, which meant that the flow conditions were ideally similar to those in the prototype (Chanson 2004), e.g. density, drag and friction coefficient of the selected human body model were approximately equal to those of the prototype .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This highlights the importance of demographic and psychological characteristics, as they can have a significant impact on a person's response time and consequently on a person's ability to adequately react to the dangers due to flooding. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that any stability thresholds based on experimental data collected using real human test subjects could be misleading and could lead to hazardous and unsafe situations in the case of a reallife flooding (Chanson et al 2014). This being the case, the predictive ability of both methods was also validated against the experimental data of Xia et al (2014).…”
Section: Comparison With the Experimental Datasetsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The two remaining heights represent different stability thresholds for pedestrians in floodwaters. Recent work (Arrighi, Oumeraci, & Castelli, 2017;Chanson, Brown, & McIntosh, 2014;Milanesi, Pilotti, & Ranzi, 2015;Xia, Falconer, Wang, & Xiao, 2014) analyse the main mechanisms that can cause human instability during floods: sliding and toppling. Additionally, Milanesi et al (2015) take into account the risk of drowning due to high water depth, considering the head completely above the water surface: 1.0 m for children and 1.4 m for adults.…”
Section: Risk Mitigation Toolsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These could include the body shape, size, mass, balance, strength, foot size, state of mind, and body response, as well as climatic conditions (darkness, temperature, and rain) and environmental hazards (water turbidity, and debris). For an idealised situation, dimensional considerations show that the stability of an unassisted individual in floodwaters is a function of the human body's characteristics (height H, density ρ H ), fluid and physical properties (density ρ, viscosity µ, gravity acceleration g), bottom surface and slope (θ), water flow characteristics, and the type of gait [22,29]. Focusing on the most relevant factors, this yields:…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%