Experimental Investigations of Debris Dynamics over a Horizontal Plane

Tsunami-Driven Debris Motion and Loads: A Critical Review

“…Nevertheless, the motion trajectories of all debris occurred well within the spreading angle of ±22.5°proposed by Naito et al (2014). Nistor et al (2016) determined that as the number of debris increased, the longitudinal displacement of the debris decreased. The latter conclusion counters the method proposed by Naito et al (2014), which suggested that as the number of debris increased, the spreading area also increased.…”

“…The latter conclusion counters the method proposed by Naito et al (2014), which suggested that as the number of debris increased, the spreading area also increased. Additionally, Nistor et al (2016) noted that the debris tended to propagate as an agglomeration which counters assumptions, made in the FEMA P646 (FEMA, 2012), that the likelihood of multiple debris impacts occurring is unlikely. Goseberg et al (2016b) built upon the study of Nistor et al (2016) by including a scaled-down built environment, to act as obstacles to the propagating debris.…”

“…Additionally, Nistor et al (2016) noted that the debris tended to propagate as an agglomeration which counters assumptions, made in the FEMA P646 (FEMA, 2012), that the likelihood of multiple debris impacts occurring is unlikely. Goseberg et al (2016b) built upon the study of Nistor et al (2016) by including a scaled-down built environment, to act as obstacles to the propagating debris. Their study found that the obstacles acted as a macro-roughness feature for both the debris and inundating flow, resulting thus in significantly shorter longitudinal displacements of the debris.…”

“…To provide a larger dataset examining the spreading area of debris in tsunami-like flow conditions, Nistor et al (2016) examined the transport of multiple scaled-down shipping containers in controlled laboratory conditions, over a flat horizontal topography and with no obstacles. The study found that the spreading angle of the debris increased as the number of debris increased.…”

“…However, Madsen et al (2008) showed that the spatial and temporal duration of a solitary wave was not on the same order of magnitude of observed tsunamis. Despite these observations, broken solitary waves have still be used to examine the nearshore impact of tsunami waves as well as incipient debris transport (Arnason et al, 2009;Chinnarasri et al, 2013;Yao et al, 2014;Nistor et al, 2016). Chanson (2006) indicated that the dam-break solution was a good representation of tsunami surge profile over a coastal plain.…”