Using single remote sensing image to calculate the height of the landslide dam and the maximum volume of the lake
- 1Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100094, China
- 2University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
- 1Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100094, China
- 2University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
Abstract. Landslide dams are caused by landslide materials blocking rivers. After the occurrence of large-scale landslides, it is necessary to conduct large-scale investigation of barrier lakes and rapid risk assessment. Remote sensing is an important means to achieve this goal. However, at present remote sensing is only used for monitoring and extraction of hydrological parameters at present, without prediction on potential hazard of the landslide dam. The key parameters of the barrier dam, such as the dam height and the maximum volume, still need to be obtained based on field investigation, which is time-consuming. Our research proposes a procedure that is able to calculate the height of the landslide dam and the maximum volume of the barrier lake, using single remote sensing image and pre-landslide DEM. The procedure includes four modules: (a) determining the elevation of the lake level, (b) determining the elevation of the bottom of the dam, (c) calculating the highest height of the dam, (d) predicting the lowest crest height of the dam and the maximum volume. Finally, the sensitivity analysis of the parameters during the procedure and the analysis of the influence of different resolution images is carried out. This procedure is demonstrated through Baige Landslide Dam in south-west China. The single image from Beijing-1 and pre-landslide DEM, SRTM V3, are used to predict the height of the dam and the key parameters of the dam break, which are in good agreement with the measured data. This procedure can effectively support the quick decision-making regarding hazard mitigation.
Weijie Zou et al.
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on nhess-2022-35', Anonymous Referee #1, 28 Feb 2022
I think that paper can be accepted, though I still have some doubts about the sufficiency of just one example (the 2018 Baige landslide dam) to validate the general applicability of the proposed method. However, I expect that it will give start for some discussion.
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Weijie Zou, 07 Mar 2022
Dear reviewer #1:
Thank you for your positive feedback! And we take your suggestion into serious discussion.
In our way of validating the theory, we have used some medium data such as the real lake area in the image and the evolution of the riverbed in order to take the error under control and support the process we promote. We think that the factor that influences the reliability of the outcome most is the process that we decide the input parameters. Therefore, we have performed sensitive analysis on the input parameters and the image solution. We agree that using only one example is vulnerable, and thus, in the following work, the discussion based on more cases will be carried out to support our method. And we are looking forward to more scholars taking part in the discussion about this method.
Kind regards.
-
RC2: 'Reply on AC1', Anonymous Referee #1, 07 Mar 2022
- AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Weijie Zou, 05 Apr 2022
- AC4: 'Reply on RC2', Weijie Zou, 05 Apr 2022
-
RC2: 'Reply on AC1', Anonymous Referee #1, 07 Mar 2022
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Weijie Zou, 07 Mar 2022
- AC2: 'Comment on nhess-2022-35', Weijie Zou, 30 Mar 2022
-
RC3: 'Comment on nhess-2022-35', Anonymous Referee #2, 04 Apr 2022
The paper introduced a method to calculate different parameters, required for risk assessment of landslide dams. The paper is presenting an interesting method. However, following points should be considered before its acceptance for publication.
• The title is ambiguous as the calculations are not merely based on a satellite image.
• Introduction should explain these parameters and also their connection with risk assessment.
• Most of the paper explains the long procedure with very short discussion and rapid hazard assessment section.
• Rapid hazard assessment section needs more explanation.
• The section should be supplemented with a figure, explaining the complete process of determination of parameters.
• May I suggest to include another landslide dam for validation purpose-
AC5: 'Reply on RC3', Weijie Zou, 06 Apr 2022
Dear Reviewer#2,
Thank you for reviewing our manuscript and your valuable advice. We all agree with you completely. Based on the comments and suggestions, we have made extensive revisions to the original manuscript. A point-by-point response is presented in the supplement.
We will revise our manuscript based on your helpful comments after interactive discussion.
Thanks again.
Weijie Zou on behalf of all co-authors.
-
AC5: 'Reply on RC3', Weijie Zou, 06 Apr 2022
-
RC4: 'Comment on nhess-2022-35', Anonymous Referee #3, 22 Apr 2022
The authors proposed a procedure for calculating the landslide dam height and barrier lake volume. I think the procedure can effectively support the quick decision-making regarding hazard mitigation. I suggest that the paper can be accepted. I also give some comments for the author to modify the manuscript.
General comments
- Lines 71-76. I think this paragraph is not appropriate in Section Introduction. In the Introduction Section, it is necessary to emphasize the disadvantages of the current methods for parameter calculation of the landslide dam.
- Two landslide dams occurred in the same position in Baige village. Please clarify which landslide dam is the object of the study.
- Are there any other methods to calculate the parameters of landslide dam, which can be used as a comparative analysis.
Some specific comments
- Line 43 “Generally speaking” and Line 71 “What’s more”, I think these words are not suitable for using in academic paper.
- Line 84 please revise. DEM, not Dem
- Please revise the sentence of Line 196. I suggest it can be modified as “The data can be found in…” or list the references in the Figure legend.
- The texts in Figure 2, 6 and 9 are too small. Please revise them.
- Lines 383-384. References should not be included in the conclusion.
-
AC6: 'Reply on RC4', Weijie Zou, 24 Apr 2022
Dear Reviewer#3
We thank you for your careful reading of the manuscript and for many constructive comments and suggestions, which were useful to improve the manuscript. Please be kind to check the attached document for our reply to your comments.
Thanks again.
Weijie Zou on behalf of all co-authors.
Weijie Zou et al.
Weijie Zou et al.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
318 | 104 | 32 | 454 | 7 | 8 |
- HTML: 318
- PDF: 104
- XML: 32
- Total: 454
- BibTeX: 7
- EndNote: 8
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1