Debris flow overflowing flexible barrier: physical process and drag load characteristics

Wang, Lingping; Song, Dongri; Zhou, Guomei; Chen, Xiao Qing; Xu, Min; Choi, Clarence Edward; Peng, Peng

doi:10.1007/s10346-022-01880-0

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However,

{F}_{\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{P}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{k}}

= 55 kN estimated by the cable‐based solution (Vicari et al., 2021) is around one in four of

{F}_{\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{P}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{k}}

= 193.3 measured from the DF case, indicating the cable‐based solution may underestimate

{F}_{\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{P}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{k}}

. A further comparison of time‐series cable tensile forces between this DF case and both large‐ and medium‐scale flume tests (Vicari et al., 2021; Wang et al., 2022) can be found in Figure S5 in Supporting Information S1. The

{T}^{\mathrm{P}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{k}}

‐

{F}_{\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{P}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{k}}

relations from all numerical cases are presented in Figure 6 in Section 3.2.3.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the subsequent impact processes (Figures A1b and A1c), the hybrid models are proposed considering hydrostatic and hydrodynamic factors (e.g., Faug, 2021;Li, Zhao, & Soga, 2021;Song et al, 2022). For instance, the hybrid formula (Wang et al, 2022;Wendeler et al, 2019) can be expressed as:…”

Section: A1 Analytical Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They require theoretical functions and empirical coefficients in conjunction with the Froude number (Fr) of impinging flows, which have been investigated in extensive studies (Kong et al., 2022; Li, Zhao, & Soga, 2021; Song et al., 2021). Fundamentally, calibrations of these Fr‐related analytical solutions and their empirical coefficients depend upon the impact loads estimated in physical tests using simplified solutions (e.g., Song et al., 2022; Tan et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2022). For example, the cable‐based solution (Ferrero et al., 2015; Ng et al., 2017) calculates the total impact load exerted on a flexible barrier by summing the normal impact forces on all its horizontal supporting cables.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Bi‐Linear Laws Govern the Impacts of Debris Flows, Debris Avalanches, and Rock Avalanches on Flexible Barrier

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geophysical mass flows impacting flexible barriers can create complex flow patterns and multiway solid‐fluid‐structure interactions, wherein estimates of impact loads rely predominantly on analytical or simplified solutions. However, an examination of the fundamental relations, applicability, and underlying mechanisms of these solutions has been so far elusive. Here, using a coupled continuum‐discrete method, we systematically examine the physical laws of multiphase, multiway interactions between geophysical flows of variable natures, and a permeable flexible ring net barrier system. This model well captures the essential physics observed in experiments and field investigations. Our results reveal for the first time that unified bi‐linear laws underpin widely used analytical and simplified solutions, with inflection points caused by the transitions from trapezoid‐shaped to triangle‐shaped dead zones. Specifically, the peak impact load increases bi‐linearly with increasing Froude number, peak cable force, or maximum barrier deformation. Flow materials (wet vs. dry) and impact dynamics (slow vs. fast) jointly drive the patterns of identified bi‐linear correlations. These findings offer a physics‐based, significant improvement over existing solutions to impact problems for geophysical flows.

show abstract

“…However,

{F}_{\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{P}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{k}}

= 55 kN estimated by the cable‐based solution (Vicari et al., 2021) is around one in four of

{F}_{\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{P}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{k}}

= 193.3 measured from the DF case, indicating the cable‐based solution may underestimate

{F}_{\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{P}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{k}}

{T}^{\mathrm{P}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{k}}

‐

{F}_{\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{P}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{k}}

relations from all numerical cases are presented in Figure 6 in Section 3.2.3.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A1 Analytical Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bi‐Linear Laws Govern the Impacts of Debris Flows, Debris Avalanches, and Rock Avalanches on Flexible Barrier

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(b) Ideal steady‐state parameters are needed for analyzing the flow regime, which are easy to achieve in controlled experiments. However, the transient traits of natural debris flows indicate that the measurement is less accurate, especially, for the measurement of surge‐flow height with splash (Wang et al., 2022) and the timing of flow fronts for determination of velocity (Nagl et al., 2020). (c) In addition, for the field observation data of debris flows, how to determine the critical particle size remains an open question.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visco‐Collisional Scaling Law of Flow Resistance and Its Application in Debris‐Flow Mobility

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flow resistance against gravity‐driven forces is a key factor controlling debris‐flow mobility, which is an important parameter for hazard risk assessment. In practice, Manning's formula is widely used for debris‐flow mobility analysis. However, this formula depends on the boundary conditions (channel roughness) and neglects the physical mechanisms of debris flow. Based on the systematic analysis of the field observation data of 93 debris‐flow events at Jiangjia Ravine (Yunnan Province, China), this study investigates the dynamic mechanisms and sources of flow resistance of debris flow. As the flows tend to be liquefied, the fluid viscous effect and particle collisions are the main sources of flow resistance. Flow resistance can be described by a visco‐collisional scaling law. Under fixed channel boundary conditions, this law is further incorporated into Manning's formula, bridging the gap between the resistance model based on physical mechanisms and the empirical formula of flow resistance. The modified Manning's coefficient is closely related to flow regimes, giving Manning's coefficient an explicit physical meaning. The modified Manning's coefficient provides a more reasonable basis for the mobility analysis and risk assessment of debris flow.

show abstract

“…Currently, woody debris mitigation structural measures can be divided into two main categories: 1) measures to guide woody debris safely downstream to protect certain objectives, such as debris deflectors and sweepers that are installed on protected objects (Bradley et al, 2004), and 2) measures to intercept woody debris at a certain location. Debris rakes and flexible barriers have been adopted to retain woody debris (Rimböck, 2004;Song et al, 2019;Wang et al, 2022;Xie et al,2017). Slit-check dams, which are a traditional open-type check dam, have been most widely used for debris flow mitigation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regulation effect of slit-check dam against woody debris flow: Laboratory test

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Woody debris flows (i.e., debris flows carrying wood) are common in mountainous and forested areas. They can cause more severe hazards due to the effects of LW (woody debris larger than 1 m in length and 10 cm in width) compared to debris flows without LW. Mitigation structures for debris flows have considered little of the regulating effect on LW and the influence of LW on the regulation effect of sediment. Thus, model tests were conducted to discuss the regulation effects of slit-check dams on woody debris flow. Research results demonstrated that slit-check dams can effectively regulate woody debris flows without overflows. Once overflow occurs, sediment trapping efficiency and the wood retention rate dramatically decrease. The sediment trapping efficiency of slit-check dams on debris flows without LW shared a linear relationship with the relative opening width, the height-to-width ratio of the opening, and the opening density. However, this was also influenced by the wood retention rate for woody debris flow. A logarithmic relationship between the sediment trapping rate and wood retention rate was obtained. The wood retention rate is mainly determined by the ratio of the LW length to the opening width, the ratio of the LW length to the channel width and the opening density of the slit-check dam. Three draining patterns of woody debris flows at the slit-check dam and three clogging types of LW at the openings of the slit-check dam were observed. Some design criteria for the structure parameters of the slit-check dam were proposed. These research results promote a better understanding of the regulation effect of slit-check dams on woody debris flows and provide a basis for the optimal design of slit-check dams.

show abstract

Debris flow overflowing flexible barrier: physical process and drag load characteristics

Cited by 8 publications

References 31 publications

Bi‐Linear Laws Govern the Impacts of Debris Flows, Debris Avalanches, and Rock Avalanches on Flexible Barrier

Bi‐Linear Laws Govern the Impacts of Debris Flows, Debris Avalanches, and Rock Avalanches on Flexible Barrier

Visco‐Collisional Scaling Law of Flow Resistance and Its Application in Debris‐Flow Mobility

Regulation effect of slit-check dam against woody debris flow: Laboratory test

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About