首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      


When hazard avoidance is not an option: lessons learned from monitoring the postdisaster Oso landslide,USA
Authors:Reid  Mark E  Godt  Jonathan W  LaHusen  Richard G  Slaughter  Stephen L  Badger  Thomas C  Collins  Brian D  Schulz  William H  Baum  Rex L  Coe  Jeffrey A  Harp  Edwin L  Schmidt  Kevin M  Iverson  Richard M  Smith  Joel B  Haugerud  Ralph A  George  David L
Institution:1.Landslide Hazards Program, U.S. Geological Survey, 350 North Akron Road, Moffett Field, CA, 94035, USA
;2.Geologic Hazards Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Box 25046, MS 966, Denver, CO, 80225, USA
;3.Cascades Volcano Observatory, U.S. Geological Survey, 1300 SE Cardinal Court, Bldg. 10, Vancouver, WA, 98683, USA
;4.Washington State Department of Natural Resources, 1111 Washington Street SE, Olympia, WA, 98504, USA
;5.Materials Lab – Geotechnical Services, Washington State Department of Transportation, P.O. Box 47365, Olympia, WA, 98504, USA
;6.Geology, Energy, Minerals, and Geophysics Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, 310 Condon Hall, Room 124, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
;
Abstract:

On 22 March 2014, a massive, catastrophic landslide occurred near Oso, Washington, USA, sweeping more than 1 km across the adjacent valley flats and killing 43 people. For the following 5 weeks, hundreds of workers engaged in an exhaustive search, rescue, and recovery effort directly in the landslide runout path. These workers could not avoid the risks posed by additional large-scale slope collapses. In an effort to ensure worker safety, multiple agencies cooperated to swiftly deploy a monitoring and alerting system consisting of sensors, automated data processing and web-based display, along with defined communication protocols and clear calls to action for emergency management and search personnel. Guided by the principle that an accelerating landslide poses a greater threat than a steadily moving or stationary mass, the system was designed to detect ground motion and vibration using complementary monitoring techniques. Near real-time information was provided by continuous GPS, seismometers/geophones, and extensometers. This information was augmented by repeat-assessment techniques such as terrestrial and aerial laser scanning and time-lapse photography. Fortunately, no major additional landsliding occurred. However, we did detect small headscarp failures as well as slow movement of the remaining landslide mass with the monitoring system. This was an exceptional response situation and the lessons learned are applicable to other landslide disaster crises. They underscore the need for cogent landslide expertise and ready-to-deploy monitoring equipment, the value of using redundant monitoring techniques with distinct goals, the benefit of clearly defined communication protocols, and the importance of continued research into forecasting landslide behavior to allow timely warning.

Keywords:
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号