首页> 外文期刊>Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences Discussions >Influence of expertise on rockfall hazard assessment using empirical methods
【24h】

Influence of expertise on rockfall hazard assessment using empirical methods

机译:经济方法对岩土危害评估专业知识对岩土危害评估的影响

获取原文
       

摘要

To date, many rockfall hazard assessment methods still consider qualitative observations within their analysis. Based on this statement, knowledge and expertise are supposed to be major parameters of rockfall assessment. To test this hypothesis, an experiment was carried out in order to evaluate the influence of knowledge and expertise on rockfall hazard assessment. Three populations were selected, having different levels of expertise: (1) students in geosciences, (2) researchers in geosciences and (3) confirmed experts. These three populations evaluated the rockfall hazard level on the same site, considering two different methods: the Laboratoire des Ponts et Chaussées (LPC) method and a method partly based on the "slope mass rating" (SMR) method. To complement the analysis, the completion of an "a priori" assessment of the rockfall hazard was requested of each population, without using any method. The LPC method is the most widely used method in France for official hazard mapping. It combines two main indicators: the predisposition to instability and the expected magnitude. Reversely, the SMR method was used as an ad hoc quantitative method to investigate the effect of quantification within a method. These procedures were applied on a test site divided into three different sectors. A statistical treatment of the results (descriptive statistical analysis, chi-square independent test and ANOVA) shows that there is a significant influence of the method used on the rockfall hazard assessment, whatever the sector. However, there is a non-significant influence of the level of expertise of the population the sectors 2 and 3. On sector?1, there is a significant influence of the level of expertise, explained by the importance of the temporal probability assessment in the rockfall hazard assessment process. The SMR-based method seems highly sensitive to the "site activity" indicator and exhibits an important dispersion in its results. However, the results are more similar with the LPC qualitative method, even in the case of sector?1.
机译:迄今为止,许多岩石危险评估方法仍然考虑其分析中的定性观察。根据这一陈述,知识和专业知识应该是岩石评估的主要参数。为了测试这一假设,进行了一个实验,以评估知识和专业知识对岩石危险评估的影响。选择了三个人群,拥有不同的专业知识:(1)地质学生,(2)地质和(3)的研究人员和(3)确认的专家。考虑到两种不同的方法,这三个群体评估了岩石危险水平,考虑了两种不同的方法:LaboratoiredeSteS etChaussées(LPC)方法和部分方法部分地基于“斜率质量额定值”(SMR)方法。要补充分析,请完成每个人口的“先验”评估岩石危险,而不使用任何方法。 LPC方法是法国最广泛使用的法国方法,用于官方危险映射。它结合了两个主要指标:易于稳定性和预期幅度。反向,SMR方法用作临时定量方法,以研究一种方法中的定量效果。这些程序应用于分为三个不同部门的测试部位。结果(描述性统计分析,Chi-Squard Indequey Test和Anova)的统计处理表明,无论扇区如何,岩石危险评估的方法都有显着影响。然而,人口2和3的人口专业知识水平存在非重大影响。在部门?1,专业知识水平的影响力很大,所以通过时间概率评估的重要性解释岩石危险评估过程。基于SMR的方法对“网站活动”指标非常敏感,并在其结果中表现出重要的分散。然而,结果与LPC定性方法更类似于扇区?1。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号