Advertisement

Numerical modelling of the long runout character of 2015 Shenzhen landslide with a general two-phase mass flow model

  • Cheng Qiao
  • Guoqiang Ou
  • Huali PanEmail author
Original Paper
  • 187 Downloads

Abstract

High fluid content or pore-fluid pressure is generally the main reason for the triggering and high mobility of landslides. A catastrophic landslide occurred at Hongao construction waste dumpsite in the Guangming New District of Shenzhen, China, on Dec 20, 2015. Due to the high water content of soil in the source area, this landslide propagated over an extremely long travel distance, with maximum length and width of the affected area 1100 m and 630 m, respectively. High water content pesents a great challenge to numerical methods. In order to simultaneously include the evolution of the solid and fluid components in the mixture, a general two-phase mass flow model of Pudasaini (J Geophys Res 117: F03010, 2012) has been employed in our simulations. The complex interactions between the solid and fluid phases, including buoyancy, the virtual mass force, generalized drag and enhanced non-Newtonian viscous stress, are considered in this two-phase flow model. These are essential aspects in the motion of landslides consisting of viscous fluid and solid particles. Based on the actual geology and engineering conditions, runout characteristics of the Shenzhen landslide were analyzed numerically. The principal reasons for the long runout character and the inundation are discussed based on the physics-based model and high-resolution numerical results.

Keywords

Shenzhen landslide Long runout Two-phase mass flow model Pore-pressure Buoyancy force r.avaflow 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This paper was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (2017YFC1502502, 2017YFC1502506), National Nature Science Foundation of China (41672318,51679229,41372331),and 135 Strategic Program of the Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, CAS (No.SDS-135-1701). It was also supported by Youth Innovation Promotion Association of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (2018405). We sincerely thank two anonymous reviewers for their constructive and valuable suggestions, which help improving this manuscript substantially.

Supplementary material

10064_2018_1329_MOESM1_ESM.gif (6 mb)
ESM 1 (GIF 6131 kb)

References

  1. Bouchut F, Fernandez-Nieto ED, Mangeney A, Narbona-Reina G (2016) A two-phase two-layer model for fluidized granular flows with dilatancy effects. J Fluid Mech 801:166–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Domnik B, Pudasaini SP, Katzenbach R, Miller SA (2013) Coupling of full two-dimensional and depth-averaged models for granular flows. J Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech 201:56–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Federico F, Cesali C (2015) An energy-based approach to predict debris flow mobility and analyze empirical relationships. Can Geotech J 52:2113–2133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Federico F, Cesali C (2017) Coupled effects of pore-water pressure evolution, slope curvature, and mass variation on the kinematics of rapidly sliding fine-grained materials. Int J Geomech 17:04017088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gao Y, Yin Y, Li B, Wang W, Zhang N, Yang C, Zuo X (2016) Investigation and dynamic analysis of the long runout catastrophic landslide at the Shenzhen landfill on December 20, 2015, in Guangdong, China. Environ Earth Sci 76(13)Google Scholar
  6. George DL, Iverson RM (2011) A two-phase debris-flow model that includes coupled evolution of volume fractions, granular dilatancy, and pore-fluid pressure. Italian journal of engineering geology and Environment:415–424Google Scholar
  7. Hungr O (2009) Numerical modelling of the motion of rapid, flow-like landslides for hazard assessment. KSCE J Civ Eng 13:281–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hunter G, Fell R (2003) Travel distance angle for "rapid" landslides in constructed and natural soil slopes. Can Geotech J 40:1123–1141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Iverson RM (1997) The physics of debris flows. Rev Geophys 35:245–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Iverson RM, Denlinger RP (2001) Flow of variably fluidized granular masses across three-dimensional terrain: 1. Coulomb mixture theory. J Geophys Res 106:537–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Iverson RM, George DL (2014) A depth-averaged debris-flow model that includes the effects of evolving dilatancy. I. Physical basis. Proceedings of the Royal Society a: mathematical. Phys Eng Sci 470:20130819–20130819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Iverson RM, George DL (2016) Modelling landslide liquefaction, mobility bifurcation and the dynamics of the 2014 Oso disaster. Géotechnique 66:175–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Iverson RM, Logan M, LaHusen RG, Berti M (2010) The perfect debris flow? Aggregated results from 28 large-scale experiments. J Geophys Res: Earth Surf 115Google Scholar
  14. Iverson RM et al (2015) Landslide mobility and hazards: implications of the 2014 Oso disaster. Earth Planet Sci Lett 412:197–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kafle J, Pokhrel P, Khattri K, Kattel P, Tuladhar B, Pudasaini SP (2016). Landslide-generated tsunami and particle transport in mountain lakes and reservoirs. Annals of Glaciology, 57(71):232-244. doi:10.3189/2016AoG71A034Google Scholar
  16. Kaitna R, Palucis MC, Yohannes B, Hill KM, Dietrich WE (2016) Effects of coarse grain size distribution and fine particle content on pore fluid pressure and shear behavior in experimental debris flows. J Geophys Res: Earth Surf 121:415–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kattel P, Khattri KB, Pokhrel PR, Kafle J, Tuladhar BM, Pudasaini SP (2016) Simulating glacial lake outburst floods with a two-phase mass flow model. Ann Glaciol 57:349–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liang H, He S, Lei X, Bi Y, Liu W, Ouyang C (2017) Dynamic process simulation of construction solid waste (CSW) landfill landslide based on SPH considering dilatancy effects. Bull Eng Geol Environ 2:1–15Google Scholar
  19. Mergili M, Fischer JT, Krenn J, Pudasaini SP (2017a) r.avaflow v1, an advanced open-source computational framework for the propagation and interaction of two-phase mass flows. Geosci Model Dev 10:553–569  https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-553-2017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mergili M, Emmer A, Juřicová A, Cochachin A, Fischer JT, Huggel C, Pudasaini SP (2017b) How well can we simulate complex hydro-geomorphic process chains? The 2012 multi-lake outburst flood in the Santa Cruz Valley (cordillera Blanca, Perú). Earth Surf Process Landf.  https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.4318
  21. Montserrat S, Tamburrino A, Roche O, Niño Y (2012) Pore fluid pressure diffusion in defluidizing granular columns. J Geophys Res: Earth Surf 117:2034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nessyahu H, Tadmor E (1990). Non-oscillatory central differencing for hyperbolic conservation laws. Journal of computational physics, 87(2):408-463.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9991(90)90260-8
  23. Neteler M, Bowman MH, Landa M, Metz M (2012) GRASS GIS: a multi-purpose open source GIS. Environ Model Softw 31:124–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ouyang C, Zhou K, Xu Q, Yin J, Peng D, Wang D, Li W (2016) Dynamic analysis and numerical modeling of the 2015 catastrophic landslide of the construction waste landfill at Guangming, Shenzhen. Chin Landslides:1–14Google Scholar
  25. Pudasaini SP (2012) A general two-phase debris flow model. J Geophys Res 117:F03010.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JF002186 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pudasaini SP, Fischer JT (2016a) A mechanical erosion model for two-phase mass flows. arXiv 1610:01806Google Scholar
  27. Pudasaini SP, Fischer JT (2016b) A mechanical model for phase-separation in debris flow. arXiv 1610:03649Google Scholar
  28. Pudasaini SP, Hutter K, Hsiau SS, Tai SC, Yongqi W, Katzenbach R (2007). Rapid flow of dry granular materials down inclined chutes impinging on rigid walls. Physics of fluids, 19:053302.  https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2726885
  29. Pudasaini SP, Krautblatter M (2014) A two-phase mechanical model for rock-ice avalanches. J Geophys Res: Earth Surf 119:2272–2290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pudasaini SP, Kröner C (2008) Shock waves in rapid flows of dense granular materials: theoretical predictions and experimental results. Phys Rev E 78(4):041308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pudasaini SP, Miller SA (2012) Buoyancy induced mobility in two-phase debris flow. AIP Conf Proc 1479(1):149–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pudasaini SP, Miller SA (2013) The hypermobility of huge landslides and avalanches. Eng Geol 157:124–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pudasaini SP, Wang Y, Hutter K (2005) Modelling debris flows down general channels. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 5:799–819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sate Administration of Work Safety (2016) The investigation report of “12·20” extremely large accident of landfill landslide at Guangming new district of Shenzhen, Guangdong. http://www.chinasafety.gov.cn/newpage/newfiles/20160715szsg.pdf 15th, July, 2016
  35. Savage SB, Hutter K (1989) The motion of a finite mass of granular material down a rough incline. J Fluid Mech 199:177–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tai YC, Noelle S, Gray JMNT and Hutter K (2002) Shock-capturing and front-tracking methods for granular avalanches. J. Comput Phys, 175(1):269–301Google Scholar
  37. Takahashi T (2014) Debris Flow: Mechanics, Prediction and Countermeasures, 2nd Edition CRC PressGoogle Scholar
  38. Wang G, Sassa K (2003) Pore-pressure generation and movement of rainfall-induced landslides: effects of grain size and fine-particle content. Eng Geol 69:109–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wang G, Zhang D, Furuya G, Yang J (2014) Pore-pressure generation and fluidization in a loess landslide triggered by the 1920 Haiyuan earthquake, China: a case study. Eng Geol 174:36–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Xu Q, Peng D, Li W, Dong X, Hu W, Tang M, Liu F (2016) The catastrophic landfill flowslide at Hongao dumpsite on December 20, 2015 in Shenzhen, China. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci Discuss 2016:1–19Google Scholar
  41. Yueping et al (2016) Mechanism of the December 2015 catastrophic landslide at the Shenzhen landfill and controlling geotechnical risks of urbanization. Engineering 2:230–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Mountain Hazards and EnvironmentChinese Academy of SciencesChengduChina
  2. 2.Key Laboratory of Mountain Surface Process and HazardsChinese Academy of SciencesChengduChina
  3. 3.University of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina
  4. 4.Anhui University of Science & TechnologyHuainanChina

Personalised recommendations