Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

How does a cluster of buildings affect landslide mobility: a case study of the Shenzhen landslide

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Landslides Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Urban landslides always occur where development has taken place on pre-existing unstable land. Due to rapid urbanization, human activities expand onto sloping terrain and disturb the geological environment, increasing the urban landslide risk. When a rapid flow-like landslide occurs, the landslide mobility can be affected by the presence of buildings located along its flow path. In this paper, the effect of building blockage on landslide mobility and the associated energy dissipation mechanisms are evaluated based on a well-documented landslide, which happened on 20 December 2015 in Shenzhen, China. The landslide flow process is reproduced by three-dimensional terrain analyses using LS-DYNA, considering three scenarios; namely, green field, movable buildings, and fixed buildings. Simulations show that the presence of densely located buildings significantly affects flow pattern, travel distance, deposition, and energy transfer mechanism. A fully developed debris fan in the flat area is observed in the green field case. The buildings in the runout path decelerate the flow process, leading to lower landslide mobility and less volume deposited in the accumulation zone. The shortest runout distance and widest and thickest deposits are observed in the fixed buildings case. The debris fan in the movable buildings case is closer to reality. Fixed buildings pose more constraint on surface moving material, leading to the largest deformation, largest internal energy, and smallest kinetic energy of the soil mass. The dissipation of the largest frictional energy occurs in the movable buildings case due to the long sliding distance of the damaged buildings. The internal energy of the landslide mass dominates the energy transfer mechanism. The results presented here indicate the need to consider building clusters when conducting urban landslide hazard mapping and risk assessment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander D (1989) Urban landslides. Prog Phys Geogr 13(2):157–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coduto D (2001) Foundation design. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, pp 259–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Dang K, Sassa K, Konagai K, Karunawardena A, Bandara RMS, Hirota K, Tan QW, Ha ND (2019) Recent rainfall-induced rapid and long-traveling landslide on 17 May 2016 in Aranayaka, Kagelle District, Sri Lanka. Landslides 16(1):155–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dikau R, Brunsden D, Schrott L, Ibsen ML (1996) Landslide recognition: identitication, movement and causes, international Association of Geomorphologists, Publication No. 5, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, 1996, 251

  • Gao L, Zhang LM, Chen HX, Shen P (2016) Simulating debris flow mobility in urban settings. Eng Geol 214:67–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García DH, Machuca S, Medina E (2019) Dynamic and geomorphic characterizations of the Mocoa debris flow (March 31, 2017, Putumayo Department, southern Colombia). Landslides 16(3):597–609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallquist JO (2006) LS-DYNA theory manual. Version 971. Livermore: software technology corporation

  • Hu KH, Cui P, Zhang JQ (2012) Characteristics of damage to buildings by debris flows on 7 August 2010 in Zhouqu, Western China. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 12(7):2209–2217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hungr O (1995) A model for the runout analysis of rapid flow slides, debris flows, and avalanches. Can Geotech J 32(4):610–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hungr O, Evans SG (1996) Rock avalanche runout prediction using a dynamic model. In proceedings of the 7th Int. Symp. on Landslides, Trondheim. Norway 11:233–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Kean JW, Staley DM, Lancaster JT, Rengers FK, Swanson BJ, Coe JA, Hernandez JL, Sigman AJ, Allstadt KE, Lindsay DN (2019) Inundation, flow dynamics, and damage in the 9 January 2018 Montecito debris-flow event, California, USA: Opportunities and challenges for post-wildfire risk assessment. Geosphere. https://doi.org/10.1130/GES02048.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koo RCH, Kwan JS, Lam C, Goodwin GR, Choi C, Ng CWW, Yiu J, Ho KKS, Pun WK (2017) Back-analysis of geophysical flows using 3-dimensional runout model. Can Geotech J 55(8):1081–1094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwan JSH, Koo RCH, Ng CWW (2015) Landslide mobility analysis for design of multiple debris-resisting barriers. Can Geotech J 52(9):1345–1359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacasse S, Nadim F (2009) Landslide risk assessment and mitigation strategy. In Landslides–Disaster Risk Reduction. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 31–61

    Google Scholar 

  • Li G, Lei Y, Yao H, Wu S, Ge J (2017) The influence of land urbanization on landslides: an empirical estimation based on Chinese provincial panel data. Sci Total Environ 595:681–690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li X, Wu Y, He S, Su L (2016) Application of the material point method to simulate the post-failure runout processes of the Wangjiayan landslide. Eng Geol 212:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo HY, Zhang LL, Zhang LM (2019) Progressive failure of buildings under landslide impact. Landslides 16(7):1327–1340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo HY, Zhang LM (2018) Simulation of building failure by landslide impact. In Proceedings of China-Europe Conference on Geotechnical Engineering. Springer, Cham, 23–26 August 2018, pp. 1500–1503

    Google Scholar 

  • Martha TR, Kumar KV (2013) September, 2012 landslide events in Okhimath, India—an assessment of landslide consequences using very high resolution satellite data. Landslides 10(4):469–479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mavrouli O, Corominas J (2010) Vulnerability of simple reinforced concrete buildings to damage by rock falls. Landslides 7(2):169–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore R, McInnes R (2016) The impacts of landslides on global society: planning for change. In: In Landslides and engineered slopes: experience, theory and practice. Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium on Landslides, Napoli, Italy, pp 1461–1468

    Google Scholar 

  • Olshansky RB, Rogers JD (1987) Unstable ground: landslide policy in the United States. Ecol Law Quart 13(4):939–1006

    Google Scholar 

  • Ouyang C, Zhou K, Xu Q, Yin J, Peng D, Wang D, Li W (2017) Dynamic analysis and numerical modeling of the 2015 catastrophic landslide of the construction waste landfill at Guangming, Shenzhen, China. Landslides 14(2):705–718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qiao C, Ou GQ, Pan HL, Ouyang CJ, Jia Y (2018) Long runout mechanism of the Shenzhen 2015 landslide: insights from a two-phase flow viewpoint. J Mt Sci 15(10):2247–2265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quan Luna B, Blahut J, Van Westen CJ, Sterlacchini S, van Asch TW, Akbas SO (2011) The application of numerical debris flow modelling for the generation of physical vulnerability curves. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 11(7):2047–2060

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuster RL (1996) Socioeconomic significance of landslides. Landslides: investigation and mitigation. Washington (DC): National Academy Press. Transp Res Board Special Rep 247:12–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Skempton AW (1985) Residual strength of clays in landslides, folded strata and the laboratory. Geotechnique 35(1):3–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sosio R, Crosta GB, Hungr O (2008) Complete dynamic modeling calibration for the Thurwieser rock avalanche (Italian Central Alps). Eng Geol 100(1–2):11–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiwari B, Upadhyaya S (2014) Effect of rainfall and building construction on a marginal slope in triggering landslide. In Landslide Science for a Safer Geoenvironment, Springer, Cham, pp 313–318

    Google Scholar 

  • Varnes, DJ (1978) Slope movement types and processes. Landslides, Analysis and Control, edited by: R.J. Schuster and R.J. Krizek. Special Report 176, Transportation Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC, 11–33

  • Xing A, Xu Q, Zhu Y, Zhu J, Jiang Y (2016) The August 27, 2014, rock avalanche and related impulse water waves in Fuquan, Guizhou, China. Landslides 13(2):411–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu Q, Peng D, Li W, Dong X, Hu W, Tang M, Liu F (2017) The catastrophic landfill flowslide at Hongao dumpsite on 20 December 2015 in Shenzhen, China. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 17(2):277–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang H, Xia J, Thompson JR, Flower RJ (2017) Urban construction and demolition waste and landfill failure in Shenzhen, China. Waste Manag 63:393–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin YP, Li B, Wang W, Zhan L, Xue Q, Gao Y, Zhang N, Chen H, Liu T, Li A (2016) Mechanism of the December 2015 catastrophic landslide at the Shenzhen landfill and controlling geotechnical risks of urbanization. Engineering 2(2):230–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang LM, Gao L, Chen HX (2016) Vulnerability of buildings to landslides: impact loads and failure mechanisms. Keynote lecture. In: Proceedings of 5th international conference on forensic geotechnical engineering. Bengaluru, India, pp 36–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeng C, Cui P, Su Z, Lei Y, Chen R (2015) Failure modes of reinforced concrete columns of buildings under debris flow impact. Landslides 12(3):561–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was supported by the Science and Technology Plan of Shenzhen (No. JCYC20180507183854827) and the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong SAR (Nos. T22-603/15N and C6012-15G).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Hong Kong, China

    H. Y. Luo, P. Shen & L. M. Zhang

  2. HKUST Shenzhen Research Institute, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, China

    H. Y. Luo & L. M. Zhang

Authors
  1. H. Y. Luo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. Shen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. L. M. Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to L. M. Zhang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Luo, H.Y., Shen, P. & Zhang, L.M. How does a cluster of buildings affect landslide mobility: a case study of the Shenzhen landslide. Landslides 16, 2421–2431 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-019-01239-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-019-01239-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation