KAYNAKLAR • Malgot, J. and Mahr, T., 1979. Engineering geological mapping of the West Carpathian landslide areas. Bull. Int. Ass. Eng. Geology, 19, 116-121. • Mancini, F., Ceppi, C., Ritrovato, G., 2010. GIS and statistical analysis for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Daunia area, Italy. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 10:1851-1864. • Mantovani, F., Soeters, R., Van Westen, C.J., 1996. Remote sensing techniques for landslide studies and hazard zonation in Europe. Geomorphology, 15, 213-225. • Marcelino, E.V., Formaggio, A.R., Maeda, E.E., 2009. Landslide inventory using image fusion techniques in Brazil. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation,Volume 11, Issue 3, 181-191. • Marjanović, M., Kovačević, M., Bajat, B., Voženílek, V., 2011. Landslide susceptibility assessment using SVM machine learning algorithm, Engineering Geology, 123, 225-234. • Martha, T.R., Kerle, N., Jetten, V., Van Westen, C.J., Kumar, K.V., 2010. Characterising spectral, spatial and morphometric properties of landslides for semi-automatic detection using object-oriented methods. Geomorphology, 116, 24-36. • Meissl, G., 1998. Modellierung der Reichweite von Felsst¨urzen. Fallbeispiele zur GIS-gest¨utzten Gefahrenbeurteilung aus dem Beierischen und Tiroler Alpenraum, Innsbrucker geografischen studien 28, Ph.D. thesis, Universit¨at Innsbruck,. • Melchiorre, C., Matteucci, M., Azzoni, A., Zanchi, A., 2008. Artificial neural networks and cluster analysis in landslide susceptibility zonation, Geomorphology, 94, 379-400. • Melchiorre, C., Castellanos Abella, E.A., Van Westen, C.J., Matteucci, M,. 2011. Evaluation of prediction capability, robustness and sensitivity in non-linear landslide susceptibility models, Guanta´namo, Cuba, Computers&Geosciences, 37, 410-425. • Metternicht, G., 2005. Remote sensing of landslides: An analysis of the potential contribution to geo-spatial systems for hazard assessment in mountainous environments. Remote Sensing of Environment,Volume 98, Issues 2-3, 284-303. • Miet Van Den Eeckhaut, Hervás, J., 2012. State of the art of national landslide databases in Europe and their potential for assessing landslide susceptibility, hazard and risk, Geomorphology, 139-140, 545-558. • Mohammady, M., Pourghasemi, H.R., Pradhan, B., 2012. Landslide susceptibility mapping at Golestan Province, Iran: A comparison between frequency ratio, Dempster–Shafer, and weights-of-evidence models, Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 61 (2012) 221-236. • Moreiras, S.M., 2005. Landslide susceptibility zonation in the Rio Mendoza Valley, Argentina,Geomorphology, 66, 345– 357. • Mowen, X., Esaki, T., Cheng, Q., Lin, J., 2007. Spatial three-dimensional landslide susceptibility mapping tool and its applications, Earth Science Frontiers, 14(6): 73-84. • Nadim, F., Kjekstad, O., Peduzzi, P., Herold, C., Jaedicke, C., 2006. Global landslide and avalanche hotspots. Landslides, 3: 159-173. • Nandi, A., Shakoor, A., 2010. A GIS-based landslide susceptibility evaluation using bivariate and multivariate statistical analyses, Engineering Geology, 110, 11-20. • Nefeslioglu, H.A., San, B.T., Gokceoglu, C., Duman, T.Y., 2012. An assessment on the use of Terra ASTER L3A data in landslide susceptibility mapping, International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 14, 40-60. • Nefeslioglu, H.A., Duman, T.Y., Durmaz, S., 2008. Landslide susceptibility mapping for a part of tectonic Kelkit Valley (Eastern Black Sea region of Turkey), Geomorphology, 94, 401-418. • Neuhäuser, B., Terhorst, B., 2007. Landslide susceptibility assessment using “weights-of-evidence” applied to a study area at the Jurassic escarpment (SW-Germany), Geomorphology, 86, 12-24. • Nichol, J.E., Shaker, A., Wong, M.-S., 2006. Application of high-resolution stereo satellite images to detailed landslide hazard assessment. Geomorphology, Volume 76, Issues 1–2, 5, 68–75. • Oh, H.-J., Pradhan, B., 2011. Application of an euro-fuzzy model to landslide-susceptibility mapping for shallow landslides in a tropical hilly area, Computers &Geosciences, 37,1264-1276. 146 Bütünleşik Tehlike Haritalarının Hazırlanması HEYELAN-KAYA DÜŞMESİ TEMEL KILAVUZ
• Ozdemir, A., Altural, T., 2013. A comparative study of frequency ratio, weights of evidence and logistic regression methods for landslide susceptibility mapping: Sultan Mountains, SW Turkey, Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 64,180-197. • Öztürk, K., 2002. Heyelanlar ve Türkiye’ye etkileri. G.Ü. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22 (2), s.35-50. • Palmström, A., 2001. Measurement and characterization of rock mass jointing. In-Situ Characterization of Rocks: Eds.: Sharma, V. M. and Saxena, K. R., Tokio, Japan, 1-40. • Pareek, N., Pal, S., Sharma, M.L., Arora, M.K., 2013. Study of effect of seismic displacements on landslide susceptibility zonation (LSZ) in Garhwal Himalayan region of India using GIS and remote sensing techniques, Computers & Geosciences, 61, 50-63. • Park, H.J., Lee, J.H., Woo, I., 2013. Assessment of rainfall-induced shallow landslide susceptibility using a GIS-based probabilistic approach, Engineering Geology, 161, 1-15. • Pavel, M., Nelson, J.D., Fannin, R.J., 2011. An analysis of landslide susceptibility zonation using a subjective geomorphic mapping and existing landslides, Computers & Geosciences, 37, 554-566. • Peng, L., Niu, R., Huangc, B., Wua, X., Zhao, Y., Ye, R., 2014. Landslide susceptibility mapping based on rough set theory and support vector machines: A case of the Three Gorges area, China, Geomorphology, 204, 287-301. • Piacentini, D., Troiani, F., Soldati, M., Notarnicola, C., Savelli, D., Schneiderbauer, S., Strada, C., 2012. Statistical analysis for assessing shallow-landslide susceptibility in South Tyrol (south-eastern Alps, Italy), Geomorphology, 151-152, 196- 206. • Popescu, M.E., 1994. A suggested method for reporting landslide causes. Bull. Of the Int. Assoc. Of Eng. Geol., 50, 71-74. • Pourghasemi, H.R., Mohammady, M., Pradhan, B., 2012. Landslide susceptibility mapping using index of entropy and conditional probability models in GIS: Safarood Basin, Iran, Catena, 97, 71-84. • Pradhan, B., 2010. Landslide Susceptibility mapping of a catchment area using frequency ratio, fuzzy logic and multivariate logistic regression approaches. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sens., 38, 301-320. • Pradhan, B., Lee, S., 2010. Landslide susceptibility assessment and factor effect analysis: backpropagation artificial neural networks and their comparison with frequency ratio and bivariate logistic regression modelling, Environmental Modelling & Software, 25, 747-759. • Pradhan, B., Lee, S., Buchroithner, M.F., 2010. A GIS-based back-propagation neural network model and its cross-application and validation for landslide susceptibility analyses, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 34, 216-235. • Rapolla, A., Paoletti, V., Secomandi, M., 2010. Seismically-induced landslide susceptibility evaluation: Application of a new procedure to the island of Ischia, Campania Region, Southern Italy, Engineering Geology, 114, 10-25. • Ray, R.L., Jacobs, J.M., Cosh, M.H., 2010. Landslide susceptibility mapping using downscaled AMSR-E soil moisture: A case study from Cleveland Corral, California, US, Remote Sensing of Environment, 114, 2624-2636. • Regmi, N.R., Giardino, J.R., Vitek, J.D., 2010. Assessing susceptibility to landslides: Using models to understand observed changes in slopes, Geomorphology, 122, 25-38. • Rengers, N., Soeters R., Van Westra, C.J., 1992. Remote Sensing and GIS Applied to Mountain Hazard Mapping, Episodes, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 36-45. • Rossi, M., Guzzetti, F., Reichenbach, P., Mondini, A.C., Peruccacci, S., 2010. Optimal landslide susceptibility zonation based on multiple forecasts, Geomorphology, 114, 129-142. • Rouiller, J. D., Jaboyedoff, M., Marro, Ch., Philippossian, F., and Mamin, M., 1998. Pentes instables dans le Pennique valaisan, vdf Hochschulverlag AG and ETH, Z¨urich., Rapport final du Programme National de Recherche PNR 31/CREALP, 98, 239 pp., (in French). • Ruff, M., Czurda, K., 2008. Landslide susceptibility analysis with a heuristic approach in the Eastern Alps (Vorarlberg, Austria), Geomorphology, 94, 314-324. • Rupke, J., Cammeraat, E., Seijmonsbergen, A.C., Van Westen, C.J., 1988. Engineering geomorphology of the Widentobel catchment, Apenzell and Sankt Gallen, Switzerland. A geomorphological inventory system applied to geotechnical appraisal of slope stability. Engineering Geology 26, 33-68. Bütünleşik Tehlike Haritalarının Hazırlanması HEYELAN-KAYA DÜŞMESİ TEMEL KILAVUZ 147
- Page 1 and 2:
AFAD Ankara, 2015
- Page 3 and 4:
önemlidir. Bu tür haritalardan fa
- Page 5 and 6:
5. HEYELAN DEĞERLENDİRMELERİNDE
- Page 7 and 8:
Şekil 3.5. Kuzulu-Koyulhisar (Bak
- Page 9 and 10:
Şekil 8.19. Kaya düşmeleri önle
- Page 11:
Çizelge 5.1. Heyelan değerlendirm
- Page 14 and 15:
1 GİRİŞ Özellikle 1950-1960’l
- Page 16 and 17:
1 GİRİŞ 50 Yıllık Periyotta 28
- Page 19 and 20:
2 HEYELANLAR ve GENEL ÖZELLİKLER
- Page 21 and 22:
2.2. Dünyada ve Türkiye’de Meyd
- Page 23 and 24:
Şekil 2.3. Türkiye’de son 50 y
- Page 25 and 26:
Ülkemizde, özellikle Karadeniz b
- Page 27 and 28:
2.3.1. Kütlesel Özellikler Heyela
- Page 29 and 30:
2.3.3. Heyelanların Aktivite Özel
- Page 31 and 32:
2.3.5. Heyelanların Aktivite Türl
- Page 33 and 34:
2.4. Heyelanların Sınıflandırı
- Page 35 and 36:
HEYELANLAR Can ve Mal Kayıpların
- Page 37 and 38:
Şekil 2.14. Heyelan sınıflamalar
- Page 39:
Şekil 2.17. Ulus (Bartın) bölges
- Page 42 and 43:
3 HEYELAN ENVANTERİ Heyelanlar, je
- Page 44 and 45:
3 HEYELAN ENVANTERİ 3.2. Heyelan E
- Page 46 and 47:
3 HEYELAN ENVANTERİ Şekil 3.4. Yu
- Page 48 and 49:
3 HEYELAN ENVANTERİ 3.3.3. Jeoloji
- Page 50 and 51:
3 HEYELAN ENVANTERİ Örneğin, Lan
- Page 52 and 53:
3 HEYELAN ENVANTERİ 3.6. Diğer Y
- Page 54 and 55:
3 HEYELAN ENVANTERİ Şekil 3.11. K
- Page 57 and 58:
4 HEYELAN ANALİZ AŞAMALARI
- Page 59 and 60:
4.1. Kullanılan Ölçekler ve Etki
- Page 61 and 62:
4.2. Jeolojik Çalışmalar Uzun s
- Page 63 and 64:
Şekil 4.4. Yenice (Karabük) bölg
- Page 65 and 66:
Trabzon Çal-Çiğdemli Köyü Heye
- Page 67 and 68:
Çizelge 4.4. Heyelan değerlendiri
- Page 69 and 70:
Şekil 4.5. Heyelan envanteri-veri
- Page 71:
Şekil 4.7. Vektör ve raster veril
- Page 74 and 75:
5 HEYELAN DEĞERLENDİRMELERİNDE K
- Page 76 and 77:
5 HEYELAN DEĞERLENDİRMELERİNDE K
- Page 78 and 79:
5 HEYELAN DEĞERLENDİRMELERİNDE K
- Page 80 and 81:
5 HEYELAN DEĞERLENDİRMELERİNDE K
- Page 82 and 83:
5 HEYELAN DEĞERLENDİRMELERİNDE K
- Page 84 and 85:
5 HEYELAN DEĞERLENDİRMELERİNDE K
- Page 87 and 88:
6 HEYELAN DUYARLILIĞI VE DEĞERLEN
- Page 89 and 90:
6.1. Jeomorfolojik Analizler Jeomor
- Page 91 and 92:
6.2.2.2. Diskriminant Analizi Diskr
- Page 93 and 94:
Şekil 6.1. Uygulamanın gerçekle
- Page 95 and 96: 6.5.3. Frekans Oranı Değerlerinin
- Page 97: ilgileriyle hesaplanabilecek ve ala
- Page 100 and 101: 7 HEYELAN TEHLİKE VE RİSK DEĞERL
- Page 102 and 103: 7 HEYELAN TEHLİKE VE RİSK DEĞERL
- Page 104 and 105: 7 HEYELAN TEHLİKE VE RİSK DEĞERL
- Page 106 and 107: 7 HEYELAN TEHLİKE VE RİSK DEĞERL
- Page 109 and 110: 8 KAYA DÜŞMESİ ANALİZLERİ
- Page 111 and 112: Buna karşın, kaya düşmesi olay
- Page 113 and 114: Potansiyel aktif kaynak alanların
- Page 115 and 116: Yukarıdaki yaklaşımla, sayısal
- Page 117 and 118: Şekil 8.9. 25x25 metre çözünür
- Page 119 and 120: Kaya düşmesi olayının gelişti
- Page 121 and 122: Çizelge 8.3. teki çok sayıdaki a
- Page 123 and 124: Çizelge 8.5. Gölge Açısı sın
- Page 125 and 126: Şekil 8.15. Konik yayılım uygula
- Page 127 and 128: Şekil 8.16. S. Martino dağlık b
- Page 129 and 130: Ormanlık ve çıplak yamaçlarda d
- Page 131 and 132: 8.7. Örnek Uygulama Bu bölümde,
- Page 133 and 134: Şekil 8.22. ISRM (1981)’e göre
- Page 135 and 136: Şekil 8.24.Farklı konik yayılım
- Page 137 and 138: G Kayma yüzeyi, yerdeğiştiren ma
- Page 139 and 140: T U V Kayan kütle içinde meydana
- Page 141 and 142: • Booth, A.M., Roering, J.J., Per
- Page 143 and 144: • Ermini, L., Catani, F., Casagli
- Page 145: • Jaiswal, P., Van Westen, C.J.,
- Page 149 and 150: • Van Den Eeckhaut, M., Marre, A.
- Page 151: KATKIDA BULUNANLAR Yürütücü Eki