““By Trial and By Trial and Error”Error”

Why do we say Why do we say that? that?

FA in Business?FA in Business?

When Toyotas Fail……

Drive it back to root cause!

Sports? Sports?

Medicine?Medicine?

We’re nominating you for the

Darwin Award!

A 48” A 48” culvert culvert

plugs on an plugs on an abandoned abandoned

roadroad

Why do we Why do we respond?respond?

Did not pay your electric bill? Did not pay your electric bill?

A 48” culvert A 48” culvert plugs on an plugs on an abandoned abandoned

roadroad

StreaStream m

divertdiverts s

200 ft 200 ft down down

the the roadroad

……initiates a new initiates a new landslide.landslide.

……mobilized approximately 200,000 mobilized approximately 200,000 ydyd33 aand delivered 50% to Bluff nd delivered 50% to Bluff

Creek...Creek...

…a key watershe

d with Chinook

coho, and

steelhead.

The Cost of No The Cost of No MaintenanceMaintenance

This road This road was built in was built in

2001 for 2001 for approximatapproximat

ely ely $750,000 $750,000

The Future?The Future? Level 1 and 2 roads are

roughly 60% of our total road miles.

Level 1 and 2 roads are

roughly 60% of our total road miles.

Monitoring Road-Watershed Monitoring Road-Watershed PerformancePerformance

Suggested Initiative for Monitoring: Suggested Initiative for Monitoring:

Combine effort to complete DSRs Combine effort to complete DSRs and INFRA to achieve road and INFRA to achieve road performance monitoringperformance monitoring

Roads are a focus of Roads are a focus of watershed monitoringwatershed monitoring

But roads vary greatly in But roads vary greatly in performance performance

Most Most do notdo not fail fail Failures tend to cluster in areas of Failures tend to cluster in areas of

inherent instabilityinherent instability

Why?Why? Failure sites create a useful dataset for Failure sites create a useful dataset for

defining road performance through timedefining road performance through time

Failures define the limits of practice in Failures define the limits of practice in various landscape situationsvarious landscape situations

When experienced road managers retire, When experienced road managers retire, mission-critical knowledge could be mission-critical knowledge could be conserved conserved

Why?Why?

Little added effort for substantial Little added effort for substantial value returnedvalue returned INFRA in place and workingINFRA in place and working DSRs completed DSRs completed Related monitoringRelated monitoring

What you getWhat you get

Ability to determine thresholds of Ability to determine thresholds of performanceperformance

Ability to determine relative risk of Ability to determine relative risk of failurefailure

Quantitative description of risksQuantitative description of risks

Failure Rate vs Distance from Stream

Willamette NF Cumulative Road Failures by Distance to Stream

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

0.00

972

33.3

45405

88

66.6

81091

76

100.

01677

76

133.

35246

35

166.

68814

94

200.

02383

53

233.

35952

12

266.

69520

71

300.

03089

29

333.

36657

88

366.

70226

47

400.

03795

06

433.

37363

65

466.

70932

24

500.

04500

82

533.

38069

41

566.

71638

600.

05206

59

633.

38775

18

666.

72343

76

700.

05912

35

733.

39480

94

766.

73049

53

800.

06618

12

833.

40186

71

Distance to Stream (m)

Fa

ilu

res

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Cumulative %

SNF Mass Wasting Road Failure Rates by Stream Proximity

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.20

50 150 151

Distance to Stream

Fa

ilu

res

/mil

e o

f R

oa

d

ONF Mass Wasting Road Failure Rates by Distance to Stream

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 251

Distance from Stream (m)

Fa

ilure

s/m

ile o

f R

oa

d

ONF Mass Wasting Road Failure Rates by Distance to Stream

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 251

Distance from Stream (m)

Fa

ilure

s/m

ile o

f R

oa

dSNF Mass Wasting Road Failure Rates by

Stream Proximity

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.20

50 150 151

Distance to Stream

Fai

lure

s/m

ile

of

Ro

ad

Willamette NF Cumulative Road Failures by Distance to Stream

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Distance to Stream (m)

Fa

ilu

res

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Cumulative %

Mass wasting road failures per mile of road in slope classes(Multiple watersheds)

0.09 0.030.14 0.13

0.32

0.550.68

0.90

1.69

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0

0-10 % 11-20% 21-30% 31-40% 41-50% 51-60% 61-70% 71-80% 81-90%

Slope class by percent

Ro

ad

fa

ilure

s/m

ile o

f ro

ad

Distribution by slope class of 229 mass wasting road failures sites

Slope Class Failures Road by Percent per mile Failures Mileage 0-10 % 0.09 4 45.91 11-20% 0.03 3 98.67 21-30% 0.14 21 147.86 31-40% 0.13 25 187.46 41-50% 0.32 53 165.52 51-60% 0.55 60 109.15 61-70% 0.68 36 53.33 71-80% 0.90 17 18.88 81-90% 1.69 8 4.73

SIUS NF Mass Wasting Road Failure Rates by Slope Position

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

30 70 71

Slope Class (%)

Fai

lure

s/m

ile

of

Ro

ad

Failure Rate vs Slope Class

<10%10-50%

>50%

<34

34to66

>66

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

Fai

lure

s/m

i

Slope Class

Slope Position

WNF: All Failures by Slope Postion and Slope Class

<34

34to66

>66

ONF Mass Wasting Road Failure Rates by Slope

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

5 15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85 95 500

Slope (%)

Fa

ilu

res

/mil

e o

f R

oa

dMass wasting road failures per mile of road in slope classes

(Multiple watersheds)

0.09 0.030.14 0.13

0.32

0.550.68

0.90

1.69

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0

0-10 % 11-20% 21-30% 31-40% 41-50% 51-60% 61-70% 71-80% 81-90%

Slope class by percent

Ro

ad

fa

ilure

s/m

ile o

f ro

ad

Distribution by slope class of 229 mass wasting road failures sites

Slope Class Failures Road by Percent per mile Failures Mileage 0-10 % 0.09 4 45.91 11-20% 0.03 3 98.67 21-30% 0.14 21 147.86 31-40% 0.13 25 187.46 41-50% 0.32 53 165.52 51-60% 0.55 60 109.15 61-70% 0.68 36 53.33 71-80% 0.90 17 18.88 81-90% 1.69 8 4.73

<10%10-50%

>50%

<34

34to66

>66

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25F

ailu

res/

mi

Slope Class

Slope Position

WNF: All Failures by Slope Postion and Slope Class

<34

34to66

>66

ONF Mass Wasting Road Failure Rates by Slope

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

5 15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85 95 500

Slope (%)

Fa

ilu

res

/mil

e o

f R

oa

d

SIUS NF Mass Wasting Road Failure Rates by Slope Steepness

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

30 70 71

Slope Class (%)

Fai

lure

s/m

ile

of

Ro

ad

Road failures per mile of road in slope positions (multiple watersheds)

0.14 0.17

0.078

0.38

0.50

0.14

0.51

0.67

0.06

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

Upper Middle LowerSlope position

Roa

d fa

ilure

s/m

ile o

f roa

dSurface Erosion (90)

Mass Wasting (229)

All Failures (319)

<10%10-50%

>50%

<34

34to66

>66

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

Fai

lure

s/m

i

Slope Class

Slope Position

WNF: All Failures by Slope Postion and Slope Class

<34

34to66

>66

SNF Mass Wasting Road Failure Rates by Slope Position

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

33 67 68

Slope Position (%)

Fai

lure

s/m

ile o

f R

oad

ONF Mass Wasting Road Failure Rates by Slope Position

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

5 15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85 95

Slope Position (%)

Fai

lure

s/m

ile

of

Ro

ad

Slope Position vs Failure RateSlope Position vs Failure RateONF Mass Wasting Road Failure Rates by Slope

Position

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

5 15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85 95

Slope Position (%)

Fai

lure

s/m

ile

of

Ro

ad

<10%10-50%

>50%

<34

34to66

>66

0.000

0.050

0.100

0.150

0.200

0.250

Fai

lure

s/m

i

Slope Class

Slope Position

WNF: All Failures by Slope Postion and Slope Class

<34

34to66

>66

Road failures per mile of road in slope positions (multiple watersheds)

0.14 0.17

0.078

0.38

0.50

0.14

0.51

0.67

0.06

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

Upper Middle LowerSlope position

Roa

d fa

ilure

s/m

ile o

f roa

d

Surface Erosion (90)

Mass Wasting (229)

All Failures (319)

SNF Mass Wasting Road Failure Rates by Slope Position

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

33 67 68

Slope Position (%)

Fai

lure

s/m

ile o

f R

oad

Mass wasting road failures per mile of road by bedrock geology(Bluff Creek Watershed)

0.87

0.710.61

0.27 0.240.12

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Serpentinite Diorite Phyllite Metasediments Metavolcanics Schist

Bedrock geology units

Roa

d fa

ilure

s/m

ile o

f roa

d

Geology and Failure Rate

ONF Northwest DistrictONF Northwest District

Use Topograpy to Use Topograpy to Define Landscape Types Define Landscape Types

for for Chi-square AnalysisChi-square Analysis

Slope:<=15%, 15-30%, 30-45%,

>45%Slope Position:

<=20%, 20-55%, 55-85%, 85-100%

Distance to Stream:<34m, 34-74m, 74-135m,

<=135m

A Need for More Specific A Need for More Specific Risk InformationRisk Information

Combine 509 known failures with 1008 randomly selected locations.

Use slope, slope position, and stream proximity to estimate relative risk of road-related landslides.

Logistic Regression Modelling:

Logistic Regression Sample Logistic Regression Sample Units Units

Relative Odds of Road-Relative Odds of Road-Related Landslides Related Landslides

Reference Segment:Slope 3%Slpos 8%Distance 213m

Slope 7% Slopos 4% Distance 27mLandslide Odds 19XReference Segment95% CL: 7, 51

Slope 23% Slopos 19% Distance 27mLandslide Odds 39XReference Segment95% CL: 15, 100

Relative Odds Compared to 2% Relative Odds Compared to 2% Slope, 2% Slope Position, 200m to Slope, 2% Slope Position, 200m to

Stream Stream

73

167

127

72

50

53

65

17

Point swarms show problem areas clearly

How you get it…How you get it…

Add DSR points and attributes to Add DSR points and attributes to INFRAINFRA

Some work remaining on attributes Some work remaining on attributes to ensure they are optimalto ensure they are optimal

How you get itHow you get it

1.1. Modify description block in DSR to include:Modify description block in DSR to include:

Failure typeFailure type

CauseCause Volume Volume (quantity classes)(quantity classes)

TotalTotal To streamTo stream To riparian area To riparian area (within 50 m)(within 50 m)

Cause Attributes…Cause Attributes…QuestionsQuestions

Perpetrator or innocent bystanderPerpetrator or innocent bystander Context Context Impact Impact

Sometimes roads Sometimes roads catch and preventcatch and preventsediment deliverysediment delivery

CANL SystemsCANL Systems

ComplexComplex AdaptiveAdaptive Non-linearNon-linear Display emergent behaviors Display emergent behaviors Benefits emerge, destructive Benefits emerge, destructive

tendencies emergetendencies emerge

W W WW W WWhat Went Wrong?What Went Wrong?

CANL SystemsCANL Systems Context develops that controls Context develops that controls

perceptions and actions. perceptions and actions.

Activities that dampen disorder are Activities that dampen disorder are encouragedencouraged

Activities that create disorder are Activities that create disorder are discouraged. discouraged.

Disturbances create disorder and Disturbances create disorder and provide opportunity to rebalance the provide opportunity to rebalance the systemsystem

THATTO

THAT

SO THAT

SO THAT

Reinforce those

activities and

behaviors

Selectively develop

informationResrouces and

information are

distributed

Secure funding

Networks shift to

Activities shift to

Behaviors shift to

Arrangements shift so that

Our biggest challengeOur biggest challenge

If consequences are hidden, If consequences are hidden, slow, debatable, quiet….slow, debatable, quiet….

CANL systems will tend to CANL systems will tend to avoid detecting failures and avoid detecting failures and therefore errors will chronically therefore errors will chronically recur. recur.

S.M.O.O. S.M.O.O. (Same Mistakes, Over and Over)(Same Mistakes, Over and Over)

So…So…

Detect and analyze failuresDetect and analyze failures Our own failings are paydirt!Our own failings are paydirt! Without this:Without this:

S.M.O.O.S.M.O.O.Don’t let the system suppress your right to learn from your failures and teach others