Abstract

Surface transportation networks are critical infrastructure that are frequently affected by volcanic ash fall. Disruption to surface transportation from volcanic ash is often complex with the severity of impacts influenced by a vast array of parameters including, among others, ash properties such as particle size and deposit thickness, meteorological conditions, pavement characteristics, and mitigation actions. Fragility functions are used in volcanic risk assessments to express the conditional probability that an impact or loss state will be reached or exceeded for a given hazard intensity. Most existing fragility functions for volcanic ash adopt ash thickness as the sole hazard intensity metric that determines thresholds for functional loss. However, the selection of appropriate hazard intensity metrics has been highlighted as a crucial factor for fragility function development and recent empirical evidence suggests that ash thickness is not always the most appropriate metric. We review thresholds of functional loss for existing published surface transportation (i.e. road rail, maritime and airport) fragility functions that use ash thickness. We then refine these existing functions through the application of results from a series of recent laboratory experiments, which investigate the impacts of volcanic ash on surface transportation. We also establish new fragility thresholds and functions, which applies ash-settling rate as a hazard intensity metric. The relative importance of alternative hazard intensity metrics to surface transportation disruption is assessed with a suggested approach to account for these in existing fragility functions. Our work demonstrates the importance of considering ash-settling rate, in addition to ash thickness, as critical hazard intensity metrics for surface transportation, but highlights that other metrics, especially particle size, are also important for transportation. Empirical datasets, obtained from both post-eruption field studies and additional laboratory experimentation, will provide future opportunities to refine fragility functions. Our findings also justify the need for rapid and active monitoring and modelling of various ash characteristics (i.e. not ash thickness alone) during volcanic eruptions, particularly as potential disruption to surface transportation can occur with only ~ 0.1 mm of ash accumulation.

Highlights

  • Surface transportation including road, rail and maritime networks are critical for many social and economic functions

  • It includes thresholds for rail that were unmodified from Wilson et al 2017, and original and newly revised thresholds for roads and airports; the revised thresholds were informed by key findings from recent laboratory experiments that can be directly related to ash accumulation (i.e. skid resistance reduction and road marking coverage (Blake et al 2016, 2017a), in addition to new post-eruption data where available

  • The decrease in function observed for IS1 when ash thickness exceeds 5.0 mm is due to the potential increase in skid resistance; it is largely informed by recent laboratory findings (which do Airports can be closed due to ash in nearby airspace, without any ground accumulation of ash (Guffanti et al 2009)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Rail and maritime networks (see Table 1 for terminology) are critical for many social and economic functions. Exclusion zones may be implemented in the immediate vicinity of the vent due to qualitative knowledge gained from past eruptions about the high likelihood of severe damage from proximal hazards such as pyroclastic density currents (PDCs) and lahars, and advice can be issued to avoid travel in relatively short-lived and localised ashfall events until ash has been cleared. It is beneficial to establish thresholds from semi-quantitative and/or quantitative data (e.g. ash thickness measurements) to indicate when specific impact types (e.g. road marking coverage or visibility impairment), and of what severity, occur These impact thresholds can in turn inform damage ratios, which express the economic cost required to restore infrastructure (i.e. absolute damage) by indicating the damaged proportion of the infrastructure (i.e. relative loss) (Reese and Ramsay 2010, Tarbotton et al 2015). A more gradational approach to assess the vulnerability of infrastructure to volcanic ash is required and fragility functions can be used in such situations

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call