7 Geologia Ambiental Riesgo Geotecnico 2021 2

GEOLOGIA AMBIENTAL.
Introducción
Dimensiones de un
deslizamiento
Medellín-Puerto
Berrío
México-Moreli
a
Los deslizamientos como amenaza geológica
Nova Friburgo, Brasil, 2011

Deformaciones de laderas (sagging)



10
11
La Fea (2004) Carretera Calderas (1990) Colombia.
Medellín-Montería 232mm en 4 horas
12
Nova Friburgo, RJ (2011). Brasil
Tarazá (2006?) Colombia. 13

Fecha: 31 de Mayo de 2008
Barrio: El Socorro
Medellín - Colombia
Volumen: 9.000 m3
Muertos: 27 personas
Perdidas materiales: 20 casas
Hora del evento: 6:00 am
RÍO GRIJALVA, CHIAPAS

“EN UN PAÍS EN PROCESO DE DESARROLLO Y CON
ESCASOS RECURSOS, PARADÓJICAMENTE POR ESAS
MISMAS RAZONES, SE HACE INDISPENSABLE REFINAR
LOS ESTUDIOS, LAS METODOLOGÍAS Y LAS
TECNOLOGÍAS, CON EL FIN DE EVITAR DUPLICACIONES
INNECESARIAS, DESPILFARRO DE PRESUPUESTOS Y
EXPOSICIÓN A PELIGROS INADVERTIDOS” Álvaro
González, 1990
Regla de la mano derecha en
evaluación de estabilidad de laderas. Ref:
Karstein Lied, NGI
Toda ladera que parece como si fuera a caerse….

…se caerá!
Toda ladera que parece estable….
…eventualmente también caerá!
Isaías 40:4
Todo valle será elevado,
Y bajado todo monte y collado;
Vuélvase llano el terreno escabroso,
Y lo abrupto, ancho valle.
2. Detonantes
1) AGUA
a) Lluvia;
b) Derretimiento de nieve;
c) Fluctuaciones del NF (por desembalse
rápido);
d) Ríos.
2) SISMICIDAD
a) Movimientos del terreno;
b) Licuefacción de suelos.
3) VOLCANIC ACTIVITY
Deslizamientos causados por Distribución de deslizamientos (1880-2007) –

lluvia en el departamento de barras - contra precipitación mensual media para
Antioquia entre 1929 y 1999. el Medellín (Aristizábal y Gómez, 2007)
2.2 Desembalse rápido
2.3 Sismos
● Han sido detectadas como
agentes detonantes desde el
año 372 A.C.
● Se tienen muchas preguntas
sin responder:
● Cuáles dependen de la
magnitud?
● Cuáles del la intensidad
del movimiento?
● Qué otros parámetros
sísmicos tienen
importancia?
2.4 Actividad volcánica
● Antecedentes históricos:
● 1595, flujos piro
clásticos que
produjeron lahares.
● 1845, lahar por
erupción sobre el río
Lagunilla, afectó
12.000 ha.
● 1985, sólo afecto 3.000
ha, destruyó Armero y
parte de Chinchiná
Alto Verde
Landslide, Medellín
29
Para pensar
According Probability of failure
National Unacceptable
University of
Colombia at
Medellin (2005)
studies about the
ALARP
current situation
of the population
in Villatina (non
recoverable high
Broadly
risk area) there acceptable
are 488 families
(aprox. 1877
habitants)
occupying this
dangerous area. Lifes lost
Aguas y talud mal hecho causaron tragedia de Alto Verde el año pasado EL
TIEMPO
El informe técnico también estableció que en la tragedia incidió una filtración de
agua en el conjunto. Así consta en el informe que entregó la comisión evaluadora
del siniestro a la Alcaldía de Medellín. Además, no existen acciones judiciales contra
los responsables de la obra.
El agua y el ángulo de inclinación del talud de corte fueron las causas del
derrumbe que, el 16 de noviembre pasado, provocaron la muerte de 12 personas y
la destrucción de seis viviendas en el barrio Alto Verde de El Poblado.
Ángela Montoya, administradora de la unidad residencial, dijo que el talud está
estabilizado y no existe demanda contra los constructores o contra otra persona o
entidad.
Bernardo Vieco, ingeniero de la firma Soluciones Geotécnicas y quien hizo parte de
la comisión evaluadora, explicó que los subcomités visitaron el lugar varias veces y
coincidieron en que las condiciones mecánicas del talud cedieron y el suelo falló,
reblandecido por la humedad de la lluvia y las aguas de una zanja.
El ángulo de inclinación del talud de corte realizado durante el proceso constructivo
era vulnerable a agentes externos como un sismo fuerte, fugas de agua o invierno.
Debió haber sido más bajo y de mejores condiciones técnicas. Además había mal
manejo de un tanque de agua y en el informe se advierte que habían convertido el
camino a él en un desagüe.
El estudio lo realizó el Sistema de atención y prevención de desastres de Medellín
(Simpad) y la Alcaldía contrató a la firma consultora Inteinsa, especializada en
geotecnia, para otra evaluación. Los resultados coincidieron.
El Poblado no tiene problemas geológicos
Carlos H. Jaramillo, secretario de Planeación, hizo énfasis en que el alud lo provocó
un asunto específico de Alto Verde. "No es generalizado de El Poblado como muchos
quisieron mostrarlo".
La Comisión de evaluación la integraron Corantioquia, Simpad, Área Metropolitana,
Secretarías de Obras Públicas y Planeación, y Gonzalo Restrepo, habitante de Alto
Verde.
FELIPE SOSA VARGAS, MEDELLÍN
Gerenciamiento del
riesgo
Gerenciamiento del riesgo
El gerenciamiento del
riesgo puede definirse
como “la aplicación
sistemática de políticas de
gerenciamiento y
procedimientos con el
objetivo de analizar,
evaluar y mitigar riesgos”
(IEC 1995)
Conceptual approach to landslide risk
management:
R=(Hp)(E)(V)
R: Risk assessment.
HP: Probability of a given hazard event.
E: Total value of the items threatened by the event (elements at
risk).
V: The vulnerability of those items to the event (the proportion of
the elements at risk eliminated by the hazard event).
Note: The product (E)(V) is often called CONSEQUENCES.
Landslide Hazard Risk Zonation: why is still so difficult? By: van Westen, van Asch &
Soeters, 2006
What makes it so difficult to map landslide risk?
1. Two buildings with different vulnerabilities because they are located in
diverse positions and might be affected by different types of landslides and in
Temporal different ways. Rainfall triggered
vulnerability of Impact/erosion Earthquake triggered
elements at Risk
2. V=f (construction type, use, size, location)
(EaR)
3. Value: each building will have different value => for Spatial probability
the same hazard the risk will be different. of landslide
4. Risk to persons. f (temporal changes in the vulnerability: initiation.
both for persons in the buildings and outside)
Degree of damage
to different types of
EaR
Probability of
Volume and type triggering event &
Run out distance
of landslide probability it will
of landslide
trigger a landslide
with given type
PROBABILISTIC APPROACH: SPATIAL (where?),
and volume???
TEMPORAL (when?) & MAGNITUDE (size?, velocity?).
RISK SCENARIO: Year 2011
La Cruz neighborhood
Foto : Marco Gamboa
Santa Elena
July 12th, 1954
Approx. 100 fatalities.
Fuente: El Colombiano
Santo Domingo Sep. 29th,
1974
Approx. 70 fatalities.
Villatina landslide
Sep. 27th, 1987
Aprox. 500
deaths.
Persons in society will tolerate higher risks than they regard as acceptable,
when they are unable to control or reduce the risk because of financial or
other
Fuente: limitations.
El Mundo
El Socorro
May 31th, 2008
28 deaths.
18/64
Alto Verde
Nov. 16th, 2008
12 casualties
Before:
PF=0,1/year
After.
PF=10-6/year
La Gabriela
5/12/2010
85 fatalities.
Foto: Juan D. Montoya

Nova Friburgo, Brasil, 2011
Nova Friburgo, RJ (2011). Brasil
Rio de Janeiro, RJ Angra dos Reis, RJ
Maceió, AL Blumenau, SC
Nova Friburgo – RJ
56
57
58
HAZARD ASSESSMENT
1. FEM for coupled hydro-mechanical analysis. García-Aristizábal (2010).
2. SHIA_LANDSLIDE: Physical based model to predict shallow landslides

triggered by rainfall in tropical environments. Aristizábal-Giraldo (2014).
3. SHIA_LANDSLIDE_PROBABILISTIC. Fernandes-Azevedo (2015).

4. Early warning system for rainfall-induced landslides. Zonghu Liao, Z.
et al. (2010);
5. Derivation of critical rainfall thresholds for debris flow warnings.
Papa, M. N. et al. (2011)
6. Analysis of the rainfall-landslide relationship in tropical mountain
areas densely urbanized. Fernandes Azevedo, G. (2012)
7. Regional rainfall-triggered landslide hazard system using ANN´s.
Montoya-Botero (2014).
8. Debris flow prediction model based on Cellular Automata Method.

Fernandes-Azevedo (2015)
Hazard map: actual inventory vs simulation
The inventory
includes only 70%
of the total
landslides
according to local
information and
historical pictures
(Mejía &
Velásquez, 1991;
Integral, 1990)
Hit rate
77%
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
Difficulties:
• Very limited data available.
• The magnitude of a possible landslide is difficult to
foresee.
• Loss estimation models do not exist for landslide
hazard.
• The damage due to landslides is more isolated
(damage in “points”) than for other events which
may cause damage in “polygons”.
PROBLEMA DE DOS BRAZOS: ECONÓMICO (FÁCIL DE RESOLVER)
Y SOCIAL (?)
EVALUACIÓN DE LA VULNERABILIDAD DE LAS
PERSONAS.
Intolerable. De 3 a 4 fatalidades por casa. Reducción

inmediata.
Marginalmente Tolerable. De 1 a 2 fatalidades por casa.

Reducción necesaria.
Tolerable. Reducción recomendada.
Aceptable.
Ragozin and Tikhvinsky

(2000)
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
1. A conceptual framework for quantitative estimation of physical
vulnerability to landslides. NGI(2008)
2. Quantitative vulnerability estimation for scenario-based landslide

hazards. NGI(2010)
3. Quantitative vulnerability estimation based on the “Modified

Gradient” concept. Guimaraes-Silva(2015)
CONCLUSION NUMBER 1:
VULNERABILITY DEPENDS ON THE INTENSITY

OF THE LANDSLIDE.
Volume: 9.000 m3
27 people died in 20 houses.
Date - time: 31/05/2008 – 6AM
Medellín - Colombia
EL PROBLEMA PAS POR LA DETERMINACIÓN DE LA
VULNERABILIDAD ESTRUCTURAL
1. Modelo NGI,
2010
Depende de la relación entre la

intensidad (I) de la masa
deslizante y la resistencia (R) del
elemento expuesto.
La
intensidad…
C: Velocidad de la masa deslizante

en el momento que impacta la
estructura.
Ddpt: Espesor (m) de la masa
deslizante (altura de los detritus) en
el momento que impacta la
estructura.
La
resistencia…
Profundidad de la fundación
(m)
Tipologia ξsty
Sigla
Estrutural
Construções LT 0,10 Estado de
simples de madeira Manutençã Sigla ξsmn
Nº de Sigla ξsht
Estruturas leves LS 0,20 Edificação o
Pav
Estruturas Mistas MS 0,40 Muito fraco VP 0,10
Um 1 S 0,10
de concreto e pavimento Fraco P 0,40
madeira
Edifício baixo 2 L 0,40 Médio M 0,80
Alvenaria e BC 0,80
concreto Edifício Médio 3a5 M 0,90 Bom G 1,20
Concreto Armado RC 1,30 Edifício Alto >6 H 1,50 Muito bom VG 1,50
Estrutura RF 1,50
reforçada
Pasar a VULNERABILIDAD
COMO DETERMINAR LA VELOCIDAD, PRESIÓN DE IMPACTO, ALTURA Y
TRAYECTORIA DEL FLUJO?
MP ALTO VERDE
M LANDSLIDE
Porterí Porterí
B
a a
A
COMO DETERMINAR LA VELOCIDAD, PRESIÓN DE IMPACTO, ALTURA Y
TRAYECTORIA DEL FLUJO?
MP
M
Marcelo Llano, 2013. Uso del Método del Punto Material para modelamiento numérico en
geomecánica, PhD Tesis, Universidad de Brasilia.
INTOLERA
BLE A
B
ACEPTA
BLE
3.Modelo T. Moraes-Guimaraes, 2015. Avaliação quantitativa da vulnerabilidade física e
associada a processos de deslizamentos de encostas. PhD Tese, Universidade de Brasília, Brasil
d
H
Nova Friburgo – RJ/Brasil
Área total: 938,5 km²
População total: 182.082

Landslides inventory: Nova Friburgo (RJ). 2011 (Tiga, 2013)
• The total area of landslides is about 20km2
• 7.268 landslides in an area of 1217 km2
• The inventory is complete for AL>10m2
Universidad de Antioquia
ANÁLISIS DEL RIESGO GEOTÉCNICO EN LADERAS
31 de Agosto - 12 de Septiembre
El modelo es calibrado con datos de
campo
DESLIZAMIENTOS:
δ=3,5
Z=0,5 Z=0,25
Proceso tipo DESLIZAMIENTO: La

vulnerabilidad está fuertemente controlada
por la distancia de viaje de la masa
deslizante.
The Nature of Landslide Hazard Impact. Thomas
Glade and Michael J. Crozier, 2005
ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
What is an acceptable risk?
•What is the value of the human life? Political and

societal controversy!
•Quantification is absolutely necessary! How can I get a
quantification of the consequences of the hazard
event?
•Many engineers consider the hazard (failure
probability) as a synonym of the risk . Are the
consequences already included?
•The problem is related to an “explosion” of different
definitions for risk. 92
Risk Assessment reveals those risks that may be disconsidered and those that must be
handled by means of decision criteria, policies and acceptable risk criteria. (Carlsson et al.,
2005)
F-N charts. Show the relationship between the hazard event frequency and the
corresponding consequence in terms of human lifes losses or economic losses.
93
Cartas F-N para diferentes tipos de
proyectos de IC. (Baecher 1982).
94
CONCLUSION NUMBER 2:
SOME THINGS THAT WE DO NOT KNOW:
How much is safe enough?

What is the acceptable risk?
….acceptable for who?
Our challenge is..
Define the acceptable levels of risk for our

societies.
Acceptable Risk: No actions needed in order to
reduce the risk.
Tolerable Risk: It is possible to face it but: (i)
permanent observation (monitoring) and (ii)
reduce it as soon as possible.
Medellin government has not defined yet (as far as I

know) the levels of acceptance and tolerability for
geotechnical risks.
PUT YOURSELF IN A RISK SITUATION AND THEN
YOU WILL BE ABLE TO ACCEPT OR TOLERATE.
Hazard Assessment: PF=0,3% (0,003). β=2,8. Tr = (1/0,003)=330 years
For t=30 years
What is the probability of

occurrence of at least one
failure?
Exponential probability
function:
PF30 (X>0)=1-e-λt
t=30 years
λ= 0,003
PF= 0,086 (8,6%).
Do you accept PF30=8,6%??
• No!! Then you realize that the risk would be
so high and in consequence not aceptable
nor tolerable.
• Reduce it to PF30=1,0% (this means
PF=0,0003) and then your answer is
PERHAPS. This means that you would
tolerate it if…..
See FN chart again!
Risk reduction and control
R=(Hp)(E)(V)
Two basic approaches: (i) Reduce the
consequences and (ii) Reduce the hazard.
(i) Easy for mobile elements at (ii) Engineering

risk (vehicles): closure of roads and works. High costs
areas in response to an initial event and disruption of
or temporarily at times when the the environment.
likelihood of hazardous events is
higher). For static elements it is
quite difficult and always
considered the MOST EXTREME
FORM OF RISK REDUCTION.
Let’s continue with the case analysis:
Classification Date Local name Fatalities Affected
Debris flow 1927 Rosellón 18 25

Debris flow 1954 Media Luna >100 67
Complex Landslide 1973 La Manguala 13 24
Debris flow 1974 Santo >70 1500
Domingo
Debris flow 1980 San Antonio >18 250
Complex Landslide 1984 Santa maría 10 200
Complex Landslide 1985 Popular 2 6 60
Complex Landslide 1987 Villatina >500 3000
Debris flow 2005 El Barro 42 60
Complex Landslide 2007 La Cruz 8 >60
Complex Landslide 2008 El Socorro 27 >60
Complex Landslide 2008 Alto Verde 12 >12
Debris flow 2010 La Gabriela 85 >130
Fast movements (>5m/s), highly destructive, considerable volume. Maximum
intensity. Highest vulnerability for structures and persons inside.
According National University of Colombia at Medellin (2005) studies about the
current situation of the population in Villatina (non recoverable high risk area) there
are 488 families (aprox. 1877 habitants) occupying this dangerous area.
Probability of failure
Unacceptable
ALARP
Broadly
acceptable
Lifes lost
How to manage? => Proposal (very risky!!)
Tolerable by society
Probability of failure
Hong Kong
PR = 5%
20
Lives lost
Challenges for the future:
❑ Improved topographic data. Topography is one of the major

factors in landslide hazard and risk zonation
❑ Improved landslide inventory mapping. Date, time, type and
volume. Societal information required as well as constructive
types. They must be updated after each triggering event.
❑ Improved landslide initiation modelling. The challenge is to link
and quantify the physical processes related to the infiltration of
rainfall to groundwater recharge and to the triggering of slope
movements. It must be considered the role of the unsaturated
zone and its relationship with vegetation.
❑ Improved run-out modelling. This is rather complicated
because the multiple transformations of the sliding mass along
its track. The most important goal is to try to model the exact
location of the source area.
Challenges for the future:
❑ Improved landslide vulnerability assessment. Little work has

been done on the quantification of physical vulnerability due to
landslides.
❖ Many types of landslides. All should be evaluated
separately.
❖ Vulnerability information should come from historical studies
in the first place.
❖ Detailed mapping of the elements at risk is necessary.
❖ Which characteristics of the EaR’s are essential for the
vulnerability study?
❖ Work on the definition of vulnerability of EaR’s.
❖ Generate damage functions.
❖ How to consider the uncertainty of the expected landslide
magnitude or volume?
❑ Improve our knowledge on societal acceptance of risk.
Conclusions about the risk analysis in geotechnical
engineering:
❑ Our knowledge about the geomaterials and their

behavior is still very limited so our risk evaluation is
not exact;
❑ We will be strongly criticized no matter the
methodology used to assess the risk evaluation;
nevertheless
❑ We must continue making this kind of studies.
Learning to do it in a meaningful and responsible
way is one of the challenges of the profession.
Es mejor estar
probablemente
correcto…
… que estar
exactamente
EQUIVOCADO!!!
107
108

7 Geologia Ambiental Riesgo Geotecnico 2021 2

Cargado por

Información del documento

Título original

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

7 Geologia Ambiental Riesgo Geotecnico 2021 2

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

GEOLOGIA AMBIENTAL.

Nova Friburgo, Brasil, 2011

Deformaciones de laderas (sagging)

Deformaciones de laderas (sagging)

Deformaciones de laderas (sagging)

Deformaciones de laderas (sagging)

Nova Friburgo, RJ (2011). Brasil

Tarazá (2006?) Colombia. 13

RÍO GRIJALVA, CHIAPAS

Toda ladera que parece como si fuera a caerse….

Deslizamientos causados por Distribución de deslizamientos (1880-2007) –

Note: The product (E)(V) is often called CONSEQUENCES.

Foto: Juan D. Montoya

2. SHIA_LANDSLIDE: Physical based model to predict shallow landslides

3. SHIA_LANDSLIDE_PROBABILISTIC. Fernandes-Azevedo (2015).

8. Debris flow prediction model based on Cellular Automata Method.

Intolerable. De 3 a 4 fatalidades por casa. Reducción

Marginalmente Tolerable. De 1 a 2 fatalidades por casa.

Ragozin and Tikhvinsky

2. Quantitative vulnerability estimation for scenario-based landslide

3. Quantitative vulnerability estimation based on the “Modified

VULNERABILITY DEPENDS ON THE INTENSITY

Depende de la relación entre la

C: Velocidad de la masa deslizante

População total: 182.082

Proceso tipo DESLIZAMIENTO: La

•What is the value of the human life? Political and

SOME THINGS THAT WE DO NOT KNOW:

How much is safe enough?

Define the acceptable levels of risk for our

Medellin government has not defined yet (as far as I

For t=30 years

What is the probability of

(i) Easy for mobile elements at (ii) Engineering

Debris flow 1927 Rosellón 18 25

❑ Improved topographic data. Topography is one of the major

❑ Improved landslide vulnerability assessment. Little work has

❑ Our knowledge about the geomaterials and their

También podría gustarte