Impact of mapping strategies on rockfall frequency-size distributions

Abstract Rockfall frequency size distributions are used in Austria for the definition of a design block for the planning of technical rockfall protection. Rockfall size datasets are often incomplete. Here, we study fifteen catalogues of rockfall size in Austria, Italy, and the USA to analyse the impact of the data collection and mapping methods on the representativeness of the catalogues and on the estimates of frequency-size statistics. To describe and compare the catalogues of rockfall size, we first use Empirical Cumulative Distribution Functions (ECDFs), followed by parametric distribution estimates in the form of Probability Density Functions (PDFs), and Cumulative Distribution Functions (CDFs). We discuss the output of Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests, the position of the frequency-size distribution rollover, and the p-value and the standard errors associated to the distribution parameters estimates to determine the reliability of our model results. In addition, we analyse the variations in the modelled CDFs for different percentiles of the frequency-size distributions to describe and discuss the representativeness of the rockfall catalogues. Our results show that different mapping strategies may affect the estimates of frequency-size distribution of rock fall volume, a relevant information when evaluating the possible impacts of rockfall processes. We conclude offering recommendations for rockfall mapping, and the use and of a non-parametric statistical method being capable to deal with small datasets, which is very typical when dealing with rockfall data. Such recommendations help for a correct dimensioning of designing rockfall mitigation measures.

[1]  Saibal Ghosh,et al.  A tool for the estimation of the distribution of landslide area in R , 2012 .

[2]  Agnès Helmstetter,et al.  Statistical analysis of rockfall volume distributions: Implications for rockfall dynamics , 2003 .

[3]  M. Rossi,et al.  Analysis of historical landslide time series in the Emilia‐Romagna region, northern Italy , 2010 .

[4]  Jordi Corominas,et al.  Magnitude and frequency relations: are there geological constraints to the rockfall size? , 2018, Landslides.

[5]  S. Lambert,et al.  Design of rockfall protection embankments: A review , 2013 .

[6]  J. Corominas,et al.  Rockfall occurrence and fragmentation , 2017 .

[7]  F. Guzzetti,et al.  Landslide inventory maps: New tools for an old problem , 2012 .

[8]  Daniele Peila,et al.  Estimation of the return period of rockfall blocks according to their size , 2017 .

[9]  Giovanni B. Crosta,et al.  A probabilistic approach for landslide hazard analysis , 2014 .

[10]  Fausto Guzzetti,et al.  Probability distributions of landslide volumes , 2009 .

[11]  Giovanni B. Crosta,et al.  Key Issues in Rock Fall Modeling, Hazard and Risk Assessment for Rockfall Protection , 2015 .

[12]  D. Cruden,et al.  Assessment of the hazard from rock fall on a highway , 1997 .

[13]  Monica Barbero,et al.  A quantitative approach for the evaluation of rockfall risk on buildings , 2017, Natural Hazards.

[14]  D. Turcotte,et al.  Landslide inventories and their statistical properties , 2004 .

[15]  Oldrich Hungr,et al.  Some methods of landslide hazard intensity mapping , 2018 .

[16]  Agnès Helmstetter,et al.  Probabilistic approach to rock fall hazard assessment: potential of historical data analysis , 2002 .

[17]  G. Wieczorek,et al.  Rockfall hazard and risk assessment in the Yosemite Valley, California, USA , 2003 .

[18]  Giovanni B. Crosta,et al.  Integrating rockfall risk assessment and countermeasure design by 3D modelling techniques , 2009 .

[19]  Fausto Guzzetti,et al.  The AVI project: A bibliographical and archive inventory of landslides and floods in Italy , 1994 .