LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
L. Milanesi; M. Pilotti; R. Ranzi; G. Valerio (2014)
Publisher: Copernicus Publications
Journal: Proceedings of the International Association of Hydrological Sciences
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: GE1-350, QE1-996.5, Environmental sciences, Geology
Hydraulic hazards in alluvial fan areas are mainly related to torrential floods and debris flows. These processes are characterized by their fast time evolution and relevant sediment load. Rational approaches for the estimation of hazard levels in flood-prone areas make use of the maps of depth and velocity, which are provided by numerical simulations of the event. This paper focuses on national regulations regarding quantitative debris-flow hazard mapping and compares them to a simple conceptual model for the quantification of the hazard levels on the basis of human stability in a flood. In particular, the proposed method takes into account, in a conceptual fashion, both the local slope and the density of the fluid, that are crucial aspects affecting stability for processes in mountain environments. Physically-based hazard criteria provide more comprehensible and objective maps, increasing awareness among stakeholders and providing more acceptable constraints for land planning.
  • No references.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.