This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
REVISTA DE GEOMORFOLOGIE
23. Universitatea „Ştefan cel Mare”. univ. Universitatea din Bucureşti Prof. Iaşi Dr. Iaşi Prof.unibuc. Institutul de Geografie. dr. Adrian CIOACĂ. Fokion VOSNIAKOS. şt. Cluj-Napoca Prof.G. I. Suceava Prof. Ion MAC. Marta JURCHESCU (Institutul de Geografie al Academiei Române) Lector dr. Virgil SURDEANU – Preşedintele A. Belgia Prof. Grecia Redacţia tehnică/Tehnical assistants: Prof. dr. Universitatea din Bucureşti Colegiul de redacţie/Editorial boards: Dr. Doriano CASTALDINI. Universitatea „Spiru Haret”. Universitatea din Salonic.84 E-mail: editura_unibuc@yahoo. Universitatea „Babeş-Bolyai”. Francesco DRAMIS. Universitatea „Ştefan ce! Mare”. dr. dr. Mihaela DINU. dr. Petre URDEA. Universitatea „Babeş-Bolyai”. Franţa Prof.. dr. dr.2 Giovanni TOSATTI. dr. dr. Bucureşti Prof.. dr. dr. Cluj-Napoca Prof. dr. dr. dr. Universitatea din Lille. Giacomo D’AMATO AVANZI. drd. Universitatea din Bucureşti Prof. dr. Universitatea „Babeş-Bolyai”. Bucureşti Prof. Dan PETREA. Universitatea din Atena. Universitatea Paris 12. dr. dr. dr. dr. univ. Universitatea „Ştefan cel Mare” Suceava Prof. Ioan POVARĂ. Bogdan MIHAI (Universitatea din Bucureşti) Cercet. dr. Ion IONIŢĂ. Eric FOUACHE. Cuza”. Dan BĂLTEANU. Contantin RUSU. dr. Universitatea „Babeş-Bolyai”. Mihai IELENICZ. docent Grigore POSEA. Cluj-Napoca Prof. Belgia Prof. Universitatea „Al. Cuza”. 2011 REVISTA DE GEOMORFOLOGIE / REVIEW OF GEOMORPHOLOGIE Editori/Editors: Prof. dr.com Internet: www. ro Tehnoredactare computerizată: Meri Pogonariu ISS 1453-5068 . Massimo BARBIERI. dr. dr. Grecia Prof.410. Emil VESPREMEANU. Universitatea din Bucureşti Prof. Italia Prof. dr. Aurel IRIMUŞ. 90-92.. Maria RĂDOANE. Paolo Roberto FEDERICI. Costică BRÂNDUŞ. André OZER. Franţa Prof. CIuj-Napoca Prof. Universitatea Roma 3. dr. Universitatea din Bucureşti Prof. Suceava Prof. Cluj Napoca Prof. Maria SANDU.editura. Universitatea din Oradea Prof.R. Universitatea de Vest. Robert DOBRE (Universitatea din Bucureşti) Şos. Roma. Bucureşti Prof. Bucureşti Prof. Institutul de Geografie. dr. Mihai GRIGORE. Doriano CASTALDINI. Florina GRECU. dr. Timişoara Prof. Universitatea din Liège. Lucian BADEA. Universitatea din Pisa. Bucureşti – 050663. Italia Prof. dr. dr. Universitatea „Spiru Haret”. Telefon/Fax: 021. Universitatea din Modena.I. Kosmas PAVLOPOULOS. Bucureşti Prof. Universitatea „Al. Nicolae RĂDOANE. Institutul de Speologie. Bucureşti Prof. Universitatea din Gand. Panduri. dr. Universitatea „Babeş-Bolyai”. Universitatea Româno-Americană. Morgan de DAPPER. Victor SOROCOVSCHI. Nicolae JOSAN. Yvonne BATHIAU-QUENNEY. Italia Prof.
............... Sandu BOENGIU............. Anca MUNTEANU................... Mihai IELENICZ................................ Cristiana VÎLCEA............... Răzvan OPREA.................. 109 Maria ALBU DINU – Călmăţui (Teleorman) Hydrographic Basin – Morphometric Analysis Elements ............................................... Marius DULGHERU.. Laura COMĂNESCU......................... RĂDOANE........................ 13 2011 CUPRINS/CONTENTS Articole/Papers N.......................................................... GRECU..................... Karel KIRCHNER...... Ionuţ CRISTEA – On periglacial processes and landforms in the Brodina River Basin (Obcinele Bucovinei) .. POP....... CRISTEA.. Titu ANGHEL............ Ionuţ CRISTEA.............. 123 Robert DOBRE – Use a GIS techniques to identify areas to consider when designing the Comarnic – Sinaia motorway sector so as to meet sustainable development requirements........... Cristina GHIŢĂ................. 51 59 67 75 Alexandru NEDELEA................... Emil CÎRCIUMARU – Land Vulnerability to Geomorphological Hazard Induced By Pluviometric Criteria (Romanian Plain) ............ Evolution and Trends ................ 83 Iulian Iulian SĂNDULACHE – Planation surfaces in the Bistricioara catchment (Eastern Carpathians) ................................... KIRCHNER.. DULGHERU....... Nicolae RĂDOANE – Geomorphological Mapping..... SURDEANU........................................................................................... ANGHEL...... Greece) ...... L............... Olimpiu POP...................................... 99 SIMONI Smaranda SIMONI (TOMA) – The Role of the Periglacial Processes in the Present Morphodynamics of the Doamnei River Basin (the Făgăraş Mountains) ...............REVISTA DE GEOMORFOLOGIE VOL.............. Czech Republic ........................................................... Evaluation of geoheritage in the western part of National Park Podyjí. Gabriel MINEA................................ EVELPIDOU – River-bed evolution during the Holocene in Kalavrita region (Northern Peloponnese..................................... Mihaela LICURICI – Landslides in the Plain Sector of the Jiu Valley ..................................... 131 ..... Robert DOBRE – Cryo-nival modeling system...... Case study: Făgăraş and Piatra Craiului Mountains ...................... 91 Dinu OPREA GANCEVICI........... Maria RĂDOANE...................... Virgil SURDEANU............ Lucie KUBALÍKOVÁ – landslide and debris-flow activity in the 5 9 19 41 sulphur mining area of Calimani Mountains (Romania). Liliana ZAHARIA – Geomorphological impact of floods in the Bâsca Catchment (Romania) .. Smaranda SIMONI (TOMA) – The Valley System Evolution in Romania ............................... STAMATOPOULOS & N...................................... Mioara CHIABURU – Relationship between trees colonization ............. Florina GRECU........
Vâlcea route is merely used by 12. relief energy). lithological maps. Romania started investing in the development of a strong. and in accordance with European norms. the current study aims. the mountainous axis Bucharest – Ploiesti – Brasov was one of the most circulated axes from the entire Carpathian bow. In the present geo-political context. as a basis between Central and Western Europe on the one hand. In the current context. homogenous transport infrastructure. with Romania part of the European Union. considering the need to build a motorway along Prahova’s Couloir. in order to create the basis of a healthy economic development. 131-139 . grants free passage to Brasov merchandisers between Buzau and Prahova. is of a more recent date compared to the other available options (Rucăr-Bran Couloir and Telejenului Valley) which served this purpose as early as the Antique Era or the Middle Ages. 13. even if it was extended and modernized in different stages. having a reduced impact upon environment. the Prahova Valley – Râşnoavei Valley route was chosen over Cozia – Turnul Roşu (Olt Valley) based on traffic value surveys despite the restrictions imposed by the relief or the many urban areas crossed through. With the help of GIS techniques. In view of the above. recommend this project as a priority. not only for strategic reasons but also to prevent disruptive events (figure 1 B). a suitable extension to the transport links crossing the old continent. geomorphological maps) and morphometric maps (declivities. abrupt slopes with intense geo-morphological processes) but also from the point of view of lands’ use (the axis of mountainous resorts Sinaia – Busteni – Predeal). Thus. and Asia Minor and the Middle East on the other hand. the identification of areas which are suitable for the construction of the first mountainous highway from Romania in the context of sustainable development proves to be an extremely important challenge. Prahova. over the Carpathians. so that they could allow a circulation with the speed of 120 km/hour in safety conditions Keywords: motorway. but especially road traffic had already exceeded the infrastructure’s limits. the buckets and declivities were done according to European norms.413 cars / day use the Bucharest – Ploieşti – Braşov route whereas the Bucharest – Piteşti – Rm. The precise representation of the crossed area was done by juxtaposing orto-photo-plans over the numerical model of the land. along the Prahova and Râşnoavelor Valleys.492 cars / day (according to the Ministry of Transport). pp. 2004). connection with the 4th Pan-European Corridor). it was identified a straightway of mountainous highway which would cross the clough. An average of 22. Romania plays an important role at the level of passengers and goods transport. Ludovic. Railway traffic. well planned. As such. its responsibilities in terms of improving the transport flow are greater. fragmentation density. The radiuses of curves. to identify the best alignment for the construction of a fast transport connection. by interposing several types of spatial data. Revista de geomorfologie vol. the future A3 motorway is the first infrastructure of the kind crossing the Carpathians. The mountainous highway would cross several sectors which are difficult from the point of view of the relief (narrowing. meaning from Ialomita’s discharge into the Danube up to Siret’s (Nistorescu. among other things. At the end of the 20 th century. Planned to link Constanţa to Central and Western Europe (from Braşov onwards by the Transylvanian Motorway to Cluj Napoca – Oradea or through Fagaras Depression on to Sibiu. The route along Prahova Valley was first mentioned in a document dated back to 1358 by which the Hungarian King.Use of GIS techniques to identify areas to consider when designing the Posada – Sinaia motorway sector so as to meet sustainable development requirements Robert DOBRE Abstract. geomorphotehnical map The transport connection. The large number of cars taking this route (figure 1 A) and the need to provide an efficient transport link. The project was done at the scale 1:3000. by interposing several ground mappings. To implement this project. GIS. 2011. tectonic maps. morphographic maps (lands’ use.
several field trips were taken so as to collect data and GIS techniques were used in lab analyses. two parallel lines were drawn. At this stage. the chosen study area (The Posada Defile) is actually the most challenging section of the Bucharest – Braşov Motorway. bizarre situation considering the rank of this transport route – European Connection. 1 quite common during weekends – A. transhumance Vadul Cerbului – Sinaia – B (foto: Dobre. as expected.of low gradient. surfaces suitable for the construction of such infrastructure that is. absolute elevation points were generated (over 121000 points). . Based on the elevation contour lines extracted from 1:5000 scale topographic maps. through interpolation. In terms of design. intersecting the previously established axis of the motorway (figure 4) The longitudinal profile of this motorway section was determined by intersecting the road axis to the absolute elevation points established thus demonstrating that the low gradient requirement is met (fig 5). and the contour line of the existing landforms (the red line). near Sinaia’s Izvor Suburb (located at an absolute altitude of 770m) over a distance of 6. located at an absolute altitude of 622. applicable further for the analysis of similar areas in the Carpathians. At a later stage. roughly calculated against the elevation of its starting point (kilometer 0+000) and that of its end point (kilometer 6+800). 2008) Most of the times. with the help of GIS techniques. for financial reasons consultancy companies developing motorway projects neglect certain environment aspects (whether it is the local geology. The difference in elevation for this motorway section.that do not overlap the existing road or railway infrastructure.. this kind of approach may turn out to be several times more costly.8 km (km 6+800) (figure 3). maintenance or other hidden costs. . as a result of environment related costs. when calculated against the entire operation period. 2011) (fig. the motorway alignment was established by drawing the axis of the future infrastructure keeping in mind the above mentioned parameters. Further.with stable lithology. the actual motorway showing slight upward / downward variations (the yellow line). The first step in this endeavour was to identify. a model. To this purpose. 1 – Busy traffic along D . thus establishing the usable width of the motorway.over 26m wide. is 148 m. Although temporarily advantageous financially. to help design such infrastructure in mountain areas. Still. When analyzing the longitudinal profile of the motorway the following parameters are of interest: the ideal motorway profile (as per the mean gradient – represented in red). areas within the following parameters: . a very useful tool (Dobre et al. based on the DEM. These considered the current study aims to provide a methodology. .5 m with Posada train station as landmark. building at the lowest price proves sometimes more tempting than landscape integrated solutions.132 R ob er t D O B R E Fig. 2). Along the axis. the previously prepared geomorphotechnical map was. a numeric terrain model was generated where each pixel equals 1 square m. . 13m apart on either side of the axis. shall be considered kilometer 0+000 of this Section which stretches up to the junction with DN1. The access point in the defile area. 3 m apart from each other. geomorphology or flora and fauna).
3 – Motorway alignment. valuable source of geomorphologic data Fig.Use of GIS techniques to identify areas to consider when designing the Posada – Sinaia motorway sector … 133 Fig. 2 – Posada Defile Section of the Motorway Project overlapped onto the geomorphotechnical map. solution proposed for the Floreiul Basin .
6). the 6. By further analyzing the particularities of the motorway alignment. Thus. floor.134 Emergency lane 2 lanes 2x3. longitudinal profile The mean gradient of the Posada Defile motorway section. In order to properly analyze the motorway design. and extreme absolute elevations within the sector (fig. The length of the high gradient sectors identified along this motorway alignment does not require such technical solutions. viaducts. the tunnel shall be the best technical solution for instances where the difference in elevation is 20 and over for the same point as identified on the motorway’s profile against the relief’s profile. the best technical solution is fill earthworks (figure 9). 3% gradient sectors were identified in the case of which specific regulations related to length and alternation with lower gradient sectors are to be observed. The data obtained up to this point was included in a database with the help of which new data was generated through spatial analyses. is 2. cut and fill earthworks. sector difference in elevation. Also. take the case of a 7m difference. For instance. should the difference in elevation be negative. 100 m long.8 km long section was divided into 68 sectors.18%.5 m Motorway axis R ob er t D O B R E Absolute elevation points Fig. etc (figures 7 and 8). 4 – Configuration of the Posada Motorway Section against the absolute elevation points determined for this Defile area Fig. an average value if calculated against gradient values of similar European road infrastructures crossing the Alps. calculated as ratio between the difference in elevation and the length of the section. by analyzing the motorway profile against the relief profile the technical solutions necessary along each of the 100 m long sectors could be identified: tunnels. As per the European Normative an additional climbing lane is to be included in the design of long uphill sectors of 3% to 4% gradient and over whereas in the case of downhill steep sectors the design of an additional lane is necessary to prevent overuse of brakes which may overheat causing runaway vehicles. elevation variation. which were further included in a database and analyzed against several parameters such as: absolute elevations at the beginning and the end of the sector. . 5 – Posada Defile Section.
The results thus achieved could be analyzed (figure 11). The identified technical solutions could further be represented in a linear graphic of the motorway section indicating also their location on either side of the motorway (figure 12). 9 – Technical solutions as per the difference in elevation between the two profiles By reclassifying the 68 motorway sectors theme we could generate.5 la – 15 < -15 Fig. for each of these. 8 – Interrelation between the two profiles Fig. the best technical solution in line with the configuration of the relief (figure 10). 6 – Parameters analyzed for each of the 68 motorway sectors identified Technical solutions Floor Cut earthworks Tunnel Fill earthworks Viaducts Values -5 la +5 +5 la + 15 > +15 . . 7 – Technical solutions as per the established difference in elevation Fig.Use of GIS techniques to identify areas to consider when designing the Posada – Sinaia motorway sector … 135 Fig.
10 – Technical solutions generated automatically through the classification of the database Fig. 11 – Graphic representation of the technical solutions identified as necessary after re-classification .136 R ob er t D O B R E Fig.
This analysis was carried out as per the European standards in force as presented in TEM Standards and Recommended Practice. so as to calculate their radius. 14 – Interrelation curve radius . extremely important parameters in determining the safest maximum speed. As per the table presented under section 3. 13 – The sectors of the Posada Motorway Section that curve were overlapped onto circles Safest maximum speed (km/h) Minimum curve radius (m) 140 1000 120 650 100 450 80 240 Fig.4 of the European Highways Design Standard based on the radius of curves four categories of safe speeds were identified (figure 14).1. 12 – Location of the works necessary on either side of the motorway The current study also takes on evaluating the feasibility of the presented design in terms of radius of the curves and horizontal curvature. Each curved motorway sector was perfectly overlapped onto circles.safest maximum speed . Fig.Use of GIS techniques to identify areas to consider when designing the Posada – Sinaia motorway sector … 137 Fig. as shown in figures 13 A and B.
The motorway project vector was exported under . orange=max 100km. 16 – Graphic representation of the safest maximum speeds along the Posada Defile Motorway Section (red = max 80km/h.kmz format and then imported into Google Earth for a better visualization (figure 17). 15 – Attribute table indicating the interrelation between ‘the perimeter of the circle’. By this exercise was determined that three of the curved sectors part of this Motorway Section require a speed limit of 80 km/h (sectors located near the entrance point in the defile area). ‘gross speed’ and ‘safest maximum speed’ The curve radius of ten of the curves occurring along the 6. the recommended gross speed was determined for each of the analyzed curves. further the safest maximum speed (which may be lower or equal to the gross speeds determined) could also be established (figure 15). Fig. radius’.138 R ob er t D O B R E Fig. another three curved sectors are to observe a speed limit of 100 km/h (also located in the first few kilometers) whereas the curved sectors forming the central body of this design allow speeds as high as 120km/h (two of them) and even 140km/hour (another two) (figure 16).8 km section was determined with the help of the GIS tool and the data was then introduce into the attribute table as new field.h. green=maxim 140km/h) . yellow=max 120km/h. These values were calculated by measuring the lengths of the circles based on the following formula: L=2πR Based on the resulting values and considering the data in the table above.
.. DOBRE. D... (3). 17 – The motorway project as imported under . SALAS L. UK. BRUNSDEN. R. pp.. (2002). Bucuresti. M. Ghe. Geomorfologie dinamică. GONZALEZ-DIEZ A.1155. I. De la Plaiul Prahovei la Sinaia. DOORNKAMP. (2004). Faculty of Geography Geomorphology – Pedology – Geomatics Dept. Geol. G. FLORINA.. Romania)”.. v. Eng. ARAMBURU J. IX. Ed.. (1975) – Large scale geomorphological mapping and highway engineering design. Bucureşti. FABBRI A. Ed. Geomorphology 66 . MIHAI. 275286. BRUSCHI V.J. (2003) – Geomorphological assessments for transport infrastrucutre projects.G. P. DOBRE R. J. .. 8: 227-253..kmz format into Google Earth REFERE CES BONACHEA J. FOOKES. D. GIUSTI C.H.M. Elsevier. B... „Impactul amenajarilor sectorului de autostrada Comarnic-Predeal asupra reliefului”. Journal of Maps. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineeres. R. 126-137. J.. 10. (2005). Ed.. BERTENS J. 2011. Universitatii. and SAVULESCU. A case study for the Prahova River Defile (Curvature Carpathians. PHIPPS P. Tehnică.4113/jom. Mott MacDonald. TOROIMAC GABRIELA. Vol. and KELLY. Transport 156. REMONDO J. GRECU.Use of GIS techniques to identify areas to consider when designing the Posada – Sinaia motorway sector … 139 Fig. Geomorphologie-relief processus environnement. (2005). Q J.K. NISTORESCU. JONES. 2010.... R. DOBRE.M. Bucureşti. GONZALEZ-LASTRA J.C.. PALMENTOLA. 95–117. CENDRERO A.. GRECU FLORINA.. University of Bucharest. Croydon.. PHIPPS P. OTERO C. istorie şi contemporaneitate. „An approach for quantifying geomorphological impacts for EIA of transportation infrastructures: a case study in northern Spain”. (2002) – Engineering geological constrains for highway schemes in Ireland: 6 Kinnegad to Athlone dual carriageway case study. Horanda Press.C. ZAHARIA LILIANA (2010) “A 2D active-channel's evolution of the Upper Prahova River (Romania) during the last 150 years”.. (2011) “The Geomorphotechnical Map: a highly detailed geomorphic map for railroad infrastructure improvement. Comunicari de Geografie.2011.J.
2902/2011 la Tipografia Editurii Universităţii din Bucureşti .Tiparul s-a executat sub c-da nr.