See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/222168592

Landslide hazard evaluation and zonation mapping in mountainous

terrain

Article  in  Engineering Geology · July 1992

DOI: 10.1016/0013-7952(92)90053-2

CITATIONS READS
405 727

1 author:

Rathinam Anbalagan
Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee
58 PUBLICATIONS   912 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Research paper View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Rathinam Anbalagan on 27 October 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Engineering Geology, 32 (1992) 269-277 269
Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam

Landslide hazard evaluation and zonation mapping in

mountainous terrain

R. A n b a l a g a n
Department of Earth Sciences, University of Roorkee, India
(Received October 23,1990; revised version accepted January 14,1992)

ABSTRACT

Anbalagan, R., 1992. Landslide hazard evaluation and zonation mapping in mountainous terrain. Eng. Geol., 32: 269-277.

Landslide hazard zonation (LHZ) maps are of great help to planners and field engineers for selecting suitable locations to
implement development schemes in mountainous terrain, as well as, for adopting appropriate mitigation measures in unstable
hazard-prone areas. A new quantitative approach has been evolved, based on major causative factors of slope instability. A
case study of landslide hazard zonation in the Himalaya, adopting a landslide- hazard evaluation factor (LHEF) rating scheme,
has been presented.

Introduction regeneration programmes can be initiated adopting

The planning, design and execution of develop-
mental schemes, such as road and building con-
struction, are often carried out too quickly due to
financial, time and other constraints. As a result
many projects may not incorporate adequate
details of geological and geotechnical considera-
tions, causing instability of hill slopes and a mani-
fold increase in the incidence of landslides. This
demonstrates the necessity of preparing multi-
purpose terrain evaluation maps, based on the
geo-environment of the mountainous terrain and
using them as the basis for planning future develop-
ment schemes.
A landslide hazard zonation (LHZ) m a p devides
the land surface into zones of varying degrees of
stability, based on an estimated significance of
causative factors in inducing instability. The L H Z
maps are useful for the following purposes:
(a) The L H Z maps identify and delineate un-
stable hazard-prone areas, so that environmental
suitable mitigation measures.
(b) These maps help planners to choose favoura-
ble locations for siting development schemes, such
as building and road constructions. Even if the
hazardous areas can not be avoided altogether,
their recognition in the initial stages of planning
may help to adopt suitable precautionary
measures.
The methodology of preparation of these maps
s h o u l d be systematic, practicable and, as far as
possible, simple so that the practicing engineers,
geologists and planners may understand and use
them effectively. Hence, a new quantitative
approach for L H Z mapping has been developed,
based on a numerical rating scheme called landslide
hazard evaluation factor ( L H E F ) rating scheme.
This technique may be effectively used during the
preliminary stages of geotechnical investigations
when a cheap and rapid hazard assessment tech-
nique is needed.
Landslide hazard evaluation factor (LHEF) rating
scheme

Correspondence to: R. Anbalagan, Department of Earth The L H E F rating scheme is based on an empiri-
Sciences, University of Roorkee, India. cal approach which combines past experience

0013-7952/92/$05.00 © 1992 - - Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. All rights reserved.

270
gained from the study of causative factors and
their impact on landslides with conditions antici-
pated in the area of study. Similar approaches
have been adopted in the well-known rock mass
classifications such as the R M R system and Q
system (Barton et al., 1974; Bieniawski, 1979).
The L H E F rating scheme is a numerical system
which is based on major inherent causative factors
of slope instability such as geology, slope morpho-
metry, relative relief, land use and land cover and
groundwater conditions. Factors like rainfall and
seismicity are not included for the purpose of LHZ
mapping. The maximum LHEF ratings for
different categories are determined on the basis of
their estimated significance in causing instability
(Table I). The number 10 indicates the maximum
value of the total estimated hazard (TEHD).
Initially, the topography of the area to be cov-
ered by LHZ mapping is studied carefully and the
hill slopes are divided into a number of facets
generally delimited by ridges, spurs, gullies and
rivers. A detailed L H E F rating scheme, showing
ratings for a variety of subcategories for individual
causative factors as given in Table 2, is discussed
below.
Geology
The geological map provides information on
the lithological and structural setting of the area.
The lithological and structural maps may also be
prepared separately for better representation.
TABLE 1
Proposed maximum LHEF rating for different contributory
factors for macro-zonation
Contributory factor Maximum
LHEF
rating
Lithology 2.0
Relationship of structural discontinuities with 2.0
slope
Slope morphometry 2.0
Relative relief 1.0
Land use and land cover 2.0
Groundwater conditions 1.0
Total 10.0
R. ANBALAGAN
Lithology
The erodibility or the response of rocks to the
processes of weathering and erosion has been the
main criteria in awarding the ratings for subcatego-
ries of lithology. E.g., rocks like quartzite, lime-
stone and igneous rocks are generally hard,
massive and resistant to erosion, forming steep
slopes. In comparison, terrigenous sedimentary
rocks are vulnerable to erosion and form more
easily landslides. Phyllites and schists are charac-
terised by flaky minerals which weather quickly
and promote instability. Accordingly, the L H E F
ratings have been awarded. A correction factor
concerning the status of weathering of rocks has
also been incorporated.
In the case of soil, genesis and age are the main
considerations in awarding the ratings. Older allu-
vium is generally well compacted and has a high
shearing resistance. Recent materials such as slide
debris are loose and have low shearing resistance.
Structure
Structure includes primary and secondary dis-
continuities in the rocks such as bedding, joints,
foliations, faults and thrusts. The disposition of
structural discontinuities in relation to slope incli-
nation and direction has a great influence on the
stability of slopes. In this connection, the following
three types of relations are considered important:
(1) The extent of parallelism between the direc-
tions of the discontinuity, or the line of intersection
of two discontinuities and the slope.
(2) The steepness of the dip of the discontinuity,
or the plunge of the line of intersection of two
discontinuities.
(3) The difference in the dip of the discontinuity,
or the plunge of the line of intersection of the two
discontinuities to the inclination of the slope.
The more the discontinuity or the line of inter-
section of two discontinuities tends to be parallel
to the slope, the greater the risk of failure. When
the dip of the discontinuity or plunge of the line
of intersection of two discontinuities increases, the
probability of failure also increases, because the
angle of friction for the discontinuity surfaces may
be reached. Moreover, till the dip of the discontinu-
LANDSLIDE H A Z A R D EVALUATION A N D ZONATION MAPPING IN M O U N T A I N O U S TERRAIN
ity plane or the plunge of the line of intersection
of the two discontinuities does not exceed the
inclination of the slope, the failure potential
remains high. Accordingly, the LHEF ratings have
been assigned for various stability conditions,
broadly on the basis of the approach indicated by
Romana (1985). In the case of soil, the inferred
depth of the soil cover has been used for awarding
the ratings.
Slope morphometry
Slope morphometry maps define slope categories
on the basis of the frequency of occurrence of
particular angles of slope. The distribution of the
slope categories is dependent on the geomorpho-
logical history of the area; the angle of slope of
each unit is a reflection of a series of localised
processes and controls, which has been imposed
on the facet. The slope morphometry map has
been prepared by dividing the larger topographical
map into smaller units. The contour lines have the
same standard spacing, i.e., the same number of
contour lines per km of horizontal distance. The
chosen categories are six in number, representing
the slopes of escarpment/cliff (> 45°), steep slope
(35°-45°), moderately steep slope (25°-35°), gentle
slope (15°-25 °) and very gentle slope (< 15°).
Relative relief
The relative relief map represents the local relief
of maximum height between the ridge top and the
valley floor within an individual facet. This shows
the major breaks in the slopes of the study area.
Three categories of slopes of relative relief have
been chosen for hazard evaluation purposes,
namely low (< 100 m ), medium (101-300 m) and
high (> 300 m).
Land use and land cover
Land cover is an indirect indication of the
stability of hill slopes. Barren and sparsely vege-
tated areas show faster erosion and greater instabil-
ity as compared to reserve or protected forests,
which are thickly vegetated and generally less
271
prone to mass wasting processes. Forest cover, in
general, smothers the action of climatic agents on
the slopes and protects them from the effects of
weathering and erosion. A well-spread root system
increases the shearing resistance of slope material.
Agriculture, in general, is practised on low to very
low slopes, though moderately steep slopes are not
spared at places. However, the agricultural lands
represent areas of repeated water charging for
cultivation purposes and as such may be consid-
ered stable. Based on criteria of intensity of vegeta-
tion cover, the ratings have been awarded.
Groundwater conditions
Because groundwater in hilly terrain is generally
channeled along structural discontinuities of rocks,
it does not have a uniform flow pattern. The
evaluation of observations of the behavior of
groundwater on hill slopes is not possible over
large areas. Therefore, in order to make a quick
appraisal, the nature of surface indications of the
behavior of groundwater will provide valuable
information on the stability of hill slopes for
hazard mapping purposes. Surface indications of
water such as damp, wet, dripping and flowing are
used for rating purposes. The observations taken
after the monsoon, provide probably the worst
groundwater conditions possible.
Methodology for landslide hazard zonation (LHZ)
mapping
The LHZ mapping technique is a macro-
zonation approach showing the probabilities of
landslide hazards. The LHZ maps are generally
prepared on 1:25,000 to 1:50,000 scales. The LHZ
mapping comprises mainly two components: desk
study and field investigations. The desk study
consists of preparation of prefield maps showing
the status of causative factors in the study area
with the help of aerial photographs, satellite imag-
eries, topographic maps and geological maps. The
prefield maps, i.e., lithological map, structural
map, slope morphometry map, relative relief map,
rock outcrop and soil cover map, land use and
land cover map, and hydrogeological map are
272 R. ANBALAGAN

TABLE 2

Landslide hazard evaluation factor (LHEF) rating scheme

Description Category Rating Remarks

factor

LITHOLOGY
Rock type Type-1 Correction .factor ,for weather&g
Quartzite and limestone 0.2 (a) Highly weathered - - rock discoloured, joints open
Granite and Gabbro 0.3 with weathering products, rock fabric altered to
Gneiss 0.4 a large extent; correction factorC~
Type-H (b) Moderately weathered - - rock discoloured with
Well-cemented terrigenous fresh rock patches, weathering more around
sedimentary rocks, dominantly joint planes, but rock in-tact in nature;
sandstone with minor beds of correction factor C2
claystone 1.0 (c) Slightly weathered - - rock slightly
Poorly cemented terrigenous discoloured along joint planes,
sedimentary rocks, dominantly which m a y be moderately tight
sandstone with minor clay shale to open, in-tact rock; correction factor C 3
beds 1.3 The correction Factor for weathering should be
Type-Ill multiplied with the fresh rock rating to get the
Slate and phyllite 1.2 corrected rating
Schist 1.3 For rock type 1
Shale with interbedded clayey and Cl=4, C2=3, C3=2
nonclayey rocks 1.8 For rock type I1
Highly weathered shale, phyllite C 1 = 1.5, C2= 1.25, C 3= 1.0
and schist 2.0
Soil type Older well-compacted fluvial fill
material (alluvial) 0.8
Clayey soil with naturally formed
surface (eluvial) 1.0
Sandy soil with naturally formed ot.¢~
surface (alluvial) 1.4
Debris comprising mostly rock
pieces mixed with clayey/sandy
soil (colluvial)
Older well compacted 1.2
Younger loose material 2.0
~5" V *~j/*¢i
STRUCTURE Parallelism between the slope and the discontinuity
Relationship of (~j/c<,- ~).
Structural
Discontinuity with
slope
Relationship of I >30 ° 0.20 cq = d i p direction of joint Bj = d i p of joint
parallelism between II 21°-30 ° 0.25 ~t~ = direction of line of B i = plunge of line of
the slope and the II 11°-20 ° 0.30 intersection of two intersection
discontinuity* IV 6°-10 ° 0.40 discontinuities of two discontinuities
Planar (cq - cq) IV < 5 ° 0.50 ~ = direction of slope B~ = inclination of slope
Wedge (cq - ~q) inclination
Category
Relationship of dip of I > 10° 0.3 *Discontinuity refers to the I = very favourable
discontinuity* and II 0°-10 ° 0.5 planar discontinuity or the line II = favourable
inclination of slope II 0° 0.7 of intersection of two planar III = fair
Planar (Bj-Bs) IV 0°-( - 10°) 0.8 discontinities, whichever, is I V = unfavourable
Wedge (B~-B~) IV ( - 10°) 1.0 important concerning instability V = very unfavourable
LANDSLIDE HAZARD EVALUATION AND ZONATION MAPPING IN MOUNTAINOUS TERRAIN 273

TABLE 2 (continued)

Description Category Rating Remarks

factor

Dip o f discontinuiO,* I < 15 ° 0.20

Planar Bj 11 16'~-25 '
Wedge B~ I1 2ff'-35" 0.25
0.30 ~ / / ~ o %
IV 36~'-45 '~ 0.40
IV > 45' 0.50
Depth of soil cover <5m 0.65 ~ ~.~,.~
6-10 m 0.85
11-15 m 1.30 ~J~.~ %
16 2 0 m 2.0
>20 m 1.20

SLOPE MORPHOMETRY
Escarpment/cliff > 45 ° 2.0
Steep slope 36 ° 45" 1.7 Relationship of dip of discontinuity and the inclination of
Moderately steep slope 26°-35 '~ 1.2 s l o p e (flj/fli - fls).
Gentle slope 16" 25" 0.8
Very gentle slope < 15~' 0.5
15"
RELATIVE RELIEF
Low < 100 m 0.3
medium 101-300 m 0.6
High > 300 m 1.0

LAND USE AND LAND C O V E R

Agricultural land/populated fiat land 0.65
Thickly vegetated forest area 0.80
Moderately vegetated area 1.2 ./'
Sparsely vegetated area with lesser ground cover 1.5
Barren land 2.0 Dip of discontinuity (flJflj).

GROUND-WATER CONDITIONS Number of contour lines over

Flowing 1.0 one cm length (I : 50,000) Slope angle
Dripping 0.8
Wet 0.5 >25 >45"
Damp 0.2 19-25 36°-45 °
Dry 0.0 13 18 26"-35 '~
8-12 16"-25"
<7 <15 '~

prepared. The information collected from the desk
study helps to plan and execute the field investiga-
tions systematically. During the field study, more
detailed lithological and structural maps are pre-
pared. The details of other maps prepared during
the desk study can be verified in the field and
modified wherever necessary. The field studies are
carried out to collect the required data facet-wise
for estimating the total hazards of the facets. The
general procedure of the LHZ mapping technique
is outlined in the form of flow a chart (Fig. 1).
Calculation of total estimated hazard (TEHD)
and hazard zonation mapping
The total estimated hazard (TEHD) indicates
the net probability of instability and is calculated
facet-wise, because adjoining facets may have
entirely different stability conditions. The TEHD
of an individual facet is obtained by adding the
ratings of the individual causative factors obtained
from the L H E F rating scheme.
Total estimated hazard (TEHD) = R~tings of
274 R. ANBALAGAN

DESKSTUDY) FIELD STUDY~

J,
I AQUISITIONOF]
t
AQUISITIONOF I
i
I REGIONAL
AOUtSmO O
NFJ
TOPOGRAPHIC AERIAL PHOTO- GEO- I
MAPS 1:50.000 GRAPHS AND LOGICAL MAP t
SATELLITE IHAG
ERIES 1:50.000 1
t
K)ENTIFICATION OF FACTORS FOR [ PRE-FIELD GEO
HAZARD EVALUATION LOGICAL MAP ~ LITHOLOGICAL AND ;TRUCTURAL
1:50.000 I I MAP 1:50.000
t
SLOPEMORPHOMETRICMAP
1
I ASSIGNMENTCF"LANDHAZARDEVALUA-I
RELATIVE RELIEF MAP i TION FACTCR (LHEF) RATINGFOR DIFF-
E~NT CATEC~RIES
ROCK OUTCROP AND SOL COVER MAP
t
LANIOUSE AND LAND COVER MAP
I CALCULATION
OFTOTAL ]
ESTIMATED HAZARD (TEHD]
PREPARATION Oil= LAND HAZARD
HYDROGEOLOGICAL MAP
ZONATION(LHZ HAP J

Fig. 1. General procedure for LHZ mapping.

(lithoiogy + structure + slope morphometry +

relative relief + land use and land cover +
groundwater conditions)
On the basis of TEHD, five categories of land-
slide hazard zones have been identified (Table 3),
namely, very low hazard (VLH), low hazard (LH),
moderate hazard (MH), high hazard (HH) and
very high hazard (VHH).

Landslide hazard zonation of the Kathgodam-

Nainital area

The LHZ map of the Kathgodam (Lat. 29°13':

Long. 79034' )-Nainital (Lat. 29°25': Long. 79°28 ')
(Fig. 2) area in Kumaun Himalaya has been pre-
pared using the LHEF rating scheme to study the
stability environment. For that purpose, the slope
facet map (Fig. 3), geological map (Fig. 4) and

TABLE 3

Landslide hazard zonation on the basis of total estimated

hazard (TEHD)

Zone TEHD value Description of zone

I <3.5 Very Low Hazard (VLH) zone

II 3.5-5.0 Low Hazard (LH) zone
III 5.1-6.0 Moderate Hazard (MH) zone
IV 6.1-7.5 High Hazard (HH) zone
V >7.5 Very High Hazard (VHH)zone
Fig. 2. Location map of Kathgodam-Nainital area.
LANDSLIDE HAZARD EVALUATION ~,ND ZONATION MAPPING IN MOUNTAINOUS TERRAIN
Fig. 3. Slope facet m a p o f K a t h g o d a m - N a i n i t a l area.
other terrain evaluation maps [such as slope mor-
phometry map (Fig. 5), relative relief map (Fig. 6)
and land use and land cover map (Fig. 7)] have
been prepared, covering all the slope facets of the
area. The groundwater condition remained gen-
erally dry though wet to flowing conditions have
been observed at some places. These conditions
have been incorporated in the calculation of the
TEHD of the facets.
Geology of the area
The autochthonous Lower Siwalik rocks consti-
tuting the Outer Himalaya are exposed in the
southern parts of the area. They comprise greyish
brown and brownish yellow, fine- to medium-
grained, micaceous, thick sandstone beds with
subordinate siltstone and claystone beds. The
Lower Siwalik rocks, exposed for 19 km along the
road, are bounded by gravelly fans of the piedmont
275
OI
FL
D[
BF
AP
LI
LC
KF
IN
BI
NAGTHAT FORMATION
SIWALIK FORMATION
LAKE
BEDDING I JOINT
FAULT
Fig. 4. G e o l o g i c a l map.
belt to the south. Towards the north, a thick
succession of predominantly Palaeozoic sedi-
mentary rocks is thrust over Lower Siwalik rocks,
the Main Boundary Thrust (MBT) marking the
contact. The Paleozoic sedimentary rocks are
divided into the Nagthat, Blaini and Krol Forma-
tions (Valdiya et al., 1984). The Nagthat Forma-
tion comprises white and purple quartzarenites
interbedded with minor grey and green slates and
phyllites. These are found to be associated with
Bhimtal volcanics comprising altered diabase,
amphibolite or chlorite schist. The Blaini Forma-
tion consists of red shales and paraconglomerates
interbedded with thin limestones beds. The Infra-
Krols Formation, succeeding the underlying
Blainis without any angular discordance, com-
prises black carbonaceous slates and shales. The
Upper Krol Formation consists of massive lime-
stone and dolomites with minor bands of red and
grey slates,the Lower and Middle Krols are com-
276
Fig. 5. Slope morphometry map.
posed of calcareous slates with bands of dolomitic
limestone. A narrow wedge of granite and quartz-
porphyry (the Amritpur granite) on the eastern
part is thrust over the Siwalik rocks along the
Salari thrust (Fig. 4). The disposition of structural
discontinuities including bedding and joints have
been observed and marked.
L H Z map of Kathgodam-Nainital area
The LHZ map of the Kathgodam-Nainital area
(Fig. 8) indicates that the area has slopes of VLH
to VHH. The southern part of the area has gen-
erally LH to MH slopes with narrow stretches of
H H slopes, trending E - W along the V-shaped
gorges.In the middle altitudes, the Jeolikote valley
shows LH slopes, generally bounded on either sides
by MH slopes. Few narrow strips of active land-
slides are present along the Balia river course close
to its confluence with the Kuria stream as well as
the Nalena stream and fall under the V H H zone.
R. ANBALAGAN
Fig. 6. Relative relief map.
These landslides may be correlated to the neotec-
tonically active fault plane (Valdia et al., 1984) off°
setting the MBT and subsequent mass wasting
along the fault scarp. The area to the east and
southeast of Nainital lake fall under H H zones
with a pocket of V H H zone.
Conclusions
The planning of development schemes, including
road construction in hilly terrain, should take into
consideration existing instabilities of slopes, so
that schemes may be executed with minimum
disturbance to the environmental balance of the
area. Hence, a new quantitative approach based
on a numerical rating scheme, the landslide hazard
evaluation factor (LHEF) rating scheme, has been
evolved. This scheme incorporates major inherent
causative factors of slope instability, and adopts a
simple practical and effective approach. It may
L A N D S L I D E H A Z A R D E V A L U A T I O N A N D Z O N A T I O N M A P P I N G IN M O U N T A I N O U S T E R R A I N 277

Fig. 7. Land use and land cover map.

Fig. 8. Landslide hazard zonation map.
have wider applications among planners, geologists
and engineers for route location and other moun-
tain development programmes. The VLH and LH Chander in the preparation of the manuscript are
zones are generally safer for development schemes. thankfully acknowledged.
The M H zones may contain some local vulnerable
zones of instabilities. In the case of H H and V H H
zones, detailed appraisals on l:1000 to 1:2000 References
scales should be carried out, to evaluate the nature Barton, N., Lien, R. and Lunde, J., 1974. Engineering classifi-
of the instabilities, in order to come to appropriate cation of rock masses for the design of tunnel support. Rock
mitigation measures to protect the geo- Mech., 6(4): 189-236.
environmental stability of the area. Bieniawski, Z.T., 1979. Tunnel design by rock mass classifica-
tions. Pennsylvania State Univ., USA, Tech. Rep., GL-79-
19.
Acknowledgements Romana, M., 1985. New adjustment ratings for application of
Bieniawski classification to slopes. Int. Symp. Role of Rock
The author is grateful to Prof. Bhawani Singh, Mechanics, Zacatecas, pp. 49-53.
Valdia, K.S., Joshi, D.D., Sanwal, R. and Tandon, S.K., 1984.
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Geomorphic development across the main boundary thrust,
Roorkee, for his encouragement and critical review an example from the Nainital hills in Kumaun Himalaya.
of this work. The valuable suggestions by Prof. R. J. Geol. Soc.Ind., 25(12):761-774.

View publication stats