Analysis of normative and technical documentation for geotechnical monitoring of landslide processes

This study provides an inductive analysis of current normative and technical documentation for geotechnical monitoring. Based on it, the main disagreements and inaccuracies were identified and measures to eliminate them were proposed. During the study, 26 current normative documents were analyzed through 32 criteria. Initially, it was determined whether these documents were included in the List of National Standards and Codes of Practice, which directly affects the obligation to comply with the document requirements. Documents without concrete requirements to monitoring or with limited range of application were excluded from further analysis. The subsequent analysis was carried out according to criteria such as the timing and cyclicity of work; the location of the source and survey points, and their quantity; the accuracy of determining the position of the points; special instructions when working on landslides, etc. As a result, significant differences have been identified among normative and technical documents governing geotechnical monitoring of landslide processes, specifically in their requirements for the timing and cyclicity of work (they range from 1 day to six months). Furthermore, there is no reliable list of controlled parameters that would be identical for several documents. The following research areas have been identified: developing a system of dependencies of the limit values for controlled parameters; standardizing the optimal number of points depending on the scale of landslide phenomena and topographic conditions of work.

1. Deng L., Yuan H., Zhang M., Chen J. Research progress on landslide deformation monitoring and early warning technology. Journal of Tsinghua University (Science and Technology). 2023;63(6):849–864. https://doi.org/10.16511/j.cnki.qhdxxb.2023.22.002

2. Randall W. Jibson. The Mameyes, Puerto Rico, landslide disaster of October 7, 1985. Geological Society of America. 1992;9. URL: https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/gsa/books/edited-volume/830/chapter-abstract/4850105/The-Mameyes-Puerto-Rico-landslide-disaster-of

3. Biek R. F., Rowley P. D., Hacker D. B. The gigantic Markagunt and Sevier gravity slides resulting from midcenozoic catastrophic mega-scale failure of the Marysvale volcanic field, Utah, USA. Geological Society of America. 2019;56. https://doi.org/10.1130/2019.0056(01)

4. K. Stephen Hughes, Alesandra C. Morales-Vélez. Storm-induced and seismic-induced landslides across Puerto Rico’s juvenile landscape: hazard recognition, quantification, and long-term impacts. Geo-Extreme. 2021;1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/9780784483695.043

5. Zamanialavijeh N., Hosseinzadehsabeti E., Ferré E. C., Hacker D. B., Biedermann A. R., Biek R. F. Kinematics of frictional melts at the base of the world's largest terrestrial landslide: Markagunt gravity slide, southwest Utah, United States. Journal of Structural Geology. 2021;153:104448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2021.104448

6. Chambers J., Holmes J., Whiteley J., Boyd J., Meldrum P., Wilkinson P., et al. Long-term geoelectrical monitoring of landslides in natural and engineered slopes. The Leading Edge. 2022;41(11):742–804. https://doi.org/10.1190/tle41110768.1

7. Rykova V. Geotechnical monitoring: documents analysis of Russian and foreign databases. Construction and Industrial Safety. 2019;(14):155–164. (In Russ.) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=41414299

8. Levshin V., Kozelkov M. Regulatory and technical base of scientific and technical support of construction. Bulletin of Science and Research Center of Construction. 2020;24(1):78–90. (In Russ.) URL: https://vestnik.cstroy.ru/jour/article/view/66

9. Shevchenko I. S., Pogodin D. A. The need for scientific and technical support of the life cycle of buildings and structures with an embedment of the underground part by more than 15 meters. Construction Production. (In Russ.) 2021;(1):48–57. https://doi.org/10.54950/26585340_2021_1_48

10. Uvarov A. I., Gorbulin R. P. Analysis of regulatory and technical documentation on geodesic monitoring of steel reservoir deformations. In: Geodeziya, zemleustroystvo i kadastry: problemy i perspektivy razvitiya: Sbornik materialov II Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii, Omsk, 26 March, 2020. Omsk: Omsk StateAgrarian Universitynamed after P.A. Stolypin; 2020. P. 101–106. (In Russ.) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=42797874

11. Shvedov S.A., Kachaev A.A., Rakova Y.A. Issues of regulatory and legal framework for geotechnical monitoring in the Russian Federation. Proektirovanie razvitiya transportnoy seti Dal'nego Vostoka [Planning the Development of the Far Eastern Transport Network]. 2022;(10):52–60. (In Russ.) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=49890751

12. Matsiy S. I., Matsiy V. S. Landslide risk assessment from geotechnical monitoring data. In: Analiz, prognoz i upravlenie prirodnymi riskami s uchetom global'nogo izmeneniya klimata «GEORISK – 2018»: Materialy X Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii po problemam snizheniya prirodnykh opasnostey i riskov: in 2 vol., Moscow, 23–24 October, 2018. Vol. 1. Moscow: Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba; 2018. С. 345–349. (In Russ.) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=36404182

13. Matsiy V. S., Matsiy S. I. Managing the quality of investigations and design for civil protection structures: a monograph. Krasnodar: Kuban State Agrarian University named after I. T. Trubilin; 2023. (In Russ.)

14. Struss S. S., Sidaravichute U. R. Analysis of normative and technical provision of geotechnical monitoring. In: Ustoychivoe razvitie zemel'no-imushchestvennogo kompleksa munitsipal'nogo obrazovaniya: zemleustroitel'noe, kadastrovoe i geodezicheskoe soprovozhdenie: Sbornik nauchnykh trudov po materialam IV natsional'noy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii, Omsk, 23 November, 2023. Omsk: Omsk StateAgrarian Universitynamed after P.A. Stolypin; 2023. P. 150–155. (In Russ.) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=65438652

15. Shagarov L. M. (eds.) Ustoychivoe razvitie osobo okhranyaemykh prirodnykh territoriy: Sbornik statey V Vserossiyskoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii, Sochi, 10–12 October, 2018. Vol. 5. Sochi: Gosudarstvennoe kazennoe uchrezhdenie Krasnodarskogo kraya "Direktsiya prirodnykh parkov Krasnodarskogo kraya"; 2018. (In Russ.) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=36358035&selid=36362363

16. Kuzmin D. N. Features of the construction of foundations of high-rise buildings on steep slopes in areas with high seismicity and various IGE. Science Bulletin. 2023;4(5):1033–1046. (In Russ.) URL https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=53838750

17. Sidaravichute U. R., Pshidatok S. K. Managing the Quality of Geotechnical Monitoring of Landslide Processes. In: Sovremennye problemy zemel'no-imushchestvennykh otnosheniy, urbanizatsii territorii i formirovaniya komfortnoy gorodskoy sredy: sbornik dokladov Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii, Tyumen, 01 December 2023. Tyumen: Industrial University of Tyumen; 2024. P. 480–485. (In Russ.) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=65623289

18. Matsii S. I., Bezuglova E. V. Geotechnical monitoring of transport structures in areas with active development of slipping displacements of soil. Geotechnical Monitoring. 2017;54:289–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11204-017-9471-3

19. Simonyan V. V. Study of landslide processes using geodetic methods. Moscow: Moscow State University of Civil Engineering; 2011. (In Russ.)

20. Sidaravichute U. R., Pshidatok S. K. Geotechnical monitoring of anti-landslide structures by means of geodetic measurements. Engineering Journal of Don. 2023;(12):467–480. (In Russ.) URL: http://www.ivdon.ru/ru/magazine/archive/n12y2023/8909