Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect
Procedia Engineering 154 ( 2016 ) 990 – 994
12th International Conference on Hydroinformatics, HIC 2016 Analysis of landslide dam failure caused by overtopping
Xuan Khanh Doa, Minseok Kimb, H.P. Thao Nguyenc, Kwansue Jungd*
aPh. D Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 305-764, Korea bResearcher, International Water Resources Institute, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 305-764, Korea cLecturer, Department of Hydrology and Water Resources, Thuyloi University, Hanoi, Vietnam dProfessor, Department of Civil Engineering, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 305-764, Korea
Abstract
Landslide dam failure is one of the most serious natural hazards worldwide. These days, the adverse impact caused by landslide dam has increased significantly due to the effect of climate change and overpopulation. This study presents the experiment describing the failure by overtopping of landslide dam in 3D shape and also proposes the 2D surface flow erosion/deposition model to simulate the breach, as well as, provide a good prediction of outflow hydrograph. The experimental results indicated both bottom erosion and side bank erosion play important role in the evolution of the landslide dam breach shape. The measured peak discharge was many times greater than the normal supplied discharge. The results obtained from numerical were then compared and showed good matching with those performed by experiment.
©© 2016 2016 The The Authors. Authors. Published Published by Elsevierby Elsevier Ltd. LtdThis. is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (Peerhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/-review under responsibility of the organizing). committee of HIC 2016. Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of HIC 2016
Keywords: landslide dam; overtopping; experiment; numerical; outflow hydrograph
1. Introduction
Landslide dam presents as a natural blockage of river by hill slope-derived mass movement [1]. Intense rainfall, rapid snow melts, volcanic eruptions, and earth quake are the most common landslide dam trigging factor [2]. Landslide dam may fail by variety of process including overtopping, abrupt collapse or progressive failure [3].
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +82-42-821-8958; fax: +82-42-821-8957. E-mail address: [email protected]
1877-7058 © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of HIC 2016 doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2016.07.587 Xuan Khanh Do et al. / Procedia Engineering 154 ( 2016 ) 990 – 994 991
However the most common failure mechanism is overtopping [4]. Over the last decades, the damages caused by landslide dam disaster have been increased significantly due to the effect of climate change and overpopulation .If the landslide dam fails, the discharge of a huge volume of both water and sediment can results in a catastrophic flood situated in the downstream area. Therefore, in order to provide adequate safety measures, thus reduce losses, the outflow hydrograph and its corresponding peak discharge have to be well predicted. In most of the previous studies, landslide dam is assumed to be failed either from full channel width or from partial channel width [5, 6, and 7]. However these assumptions are still not absolutely correct. The field observation made by [8] and the experiments performed by [9] indicated that the landslide dam shapes have a continuous decrease of height in lateral direction instead of a constant height with a notch. Through experiments and numerical method, this study aims to describe the failure process of landslide dam having 3D shape, as well as, provide an approach to have a good prediction of the outflow hydrograph.
2. Experimental method
The experiments were carried out in a flume, 5.0 m long, 0.5 m wide, and 0.6 m deep. This one-side glass flume was fixed with a bottom slope (θ) of 1:500. The dam is located at 2.0 m from the inlet of the flume. Fine sand of mean diameter 0.42 mm was used to prepare landslide dams in the flume. The geometry of the landslide dam is determined by the following parameters: the longitudinal base length (LB) is 0.9 m, the width of landslide dam (W) is equal to the flume width which is 0.5 m, and the right height (hr) and the left height (hl) of the dam are 0.2 m and 0.1 m, respectively. A constant inflow discharge of 233cm3/s was supplied at the upstream end of flume. A grid size scale 5.0 cm long × 2.0 cm height covering the shape of the landslide dam was set at the glass side wall to record the changes of dam surface at different time. The whole processes including the variation of water level in the reservoir and the evaluation of breach were captured by two digital cameras. One camera was place at the top in front of the landslide dam and the other was placed at the left side of flume. In order to measure the outflow hydrograph, a series of buckets was prepared at the downstream end of the flume. The average discharge in every 5 second after the dam break was calculated by the volume of water collected by one bucket in the same 5 seconds period. The flume experiment set up is presented in Figure 1.
5.0
Camera 2
0.6
hr Qin
hl W 0.5
0.6 0.3 2.0 All dimensions are in m Bucket LB to collect outflow Camera 1 discharge Fig.1 Experimental setup of the failure of landslide dam caused by overtopping
3. Numerical method
The mathematical model developed by [10] was used to investigate the surface flow and erosion/deposition on the surface of the model slope. The depth-wise averaged 2D momentum equations for the x-wise (down valley) and y-wise (lateral direction) respectively are. 992 Xuan Khanh Do et al. / Procedia Engineering 154 ( 2016 ) 990 – 994
wwMuMvM() w () w()hzbbxW EE ghsin TTbx gh cos bx (1) wwtx w y w xUt
wwNuNvN() w () w()hzb W by EE ghsin Tby ghcos T by (2) wwtx w y w yUt The continuity equation of the total volume wwhM w N ic{(1)} c s wwtxy w **b (3)
The continuity equation of the particle fraction wwch() cM w () cN ic wwtx w y* (4)
The equation for the change of bed surface elevation wz b ii i wt sml smr (5) where M (=uh) and N (=vh) are the flow discharge per unit width in the x and y direction; u and v are the depth- averaged velocity in the x and y direction; h is the water depth; g is the gravitational acceleration; β is the momentum correction factor equal to 1.25 for stony type debris flow and 1.0 for both an immature debris flow and a turbulent flow; θb is the bed slope; zb is the erosion or deposition thickness measured from the original bed elevation; τb is the bottom shear stresses in the x direction; ρT is the mixture density [ρT = c σ+(1- c)ρ]; sb is the degree of saturation in the bed; i is the rate of hydraulic erosion or deposition from the flowing water; c is the c sediment concentration in the flow; * is the maximum sediment concentration in the bed; ρ is the density of water; σ is the density of the sediment particles, and isml and ismr are the mean recessing velocity of the left and right hand side banks of the incised channel.
4. Results and discussions
After the formation of the dam, a steady discharge of 223cm3/s from the upstream part of the flume was supplied to create an artificial reservoir. The observation showed that at the time t=350s the flow started to overtop the dam. The breach was developed firstly at the left side in the lowest point of the dam crest. The overtopping flow then eroded the downstream surface of the dam creating an erosion gully. This gully was gradually deepened continuously by bottom erosion and enlarged to the right side by the effect of side bank erosion. Finally, at the time t=514s, the eroded surface at dam crest position was observed to reach the bottom slope Figure 2. The Figure 3a present the comparison of dam surface erosion at the right side of flume between simulated and experiments. Though there were some small gaps, the simulated surface at various time steps in was similar to observed data. On the other hand, the variation of the cross sectional shape at the dam crest was simulated in Figure 3b. In some early stage, from overtopping time to about 420 second the erosion channel was eroded significantly in both downward and lateral direction due to the bottom and side bank erosion. However, in the later stage, after the time 420s these erosion processes, especially the side bank erosion reduced remarkably. It was due to the drop of surface flow height resulting in the decrease of erosion velocity. Finally, the simulated and experimental outflow discharge was compared in Figure 4. The simulated peak discharge was 1399cm3/s which was similar to observed value of 1316cm3/s. This peak discharge was nearly 6 times greater than the supplied discharge of 223cm3/s. The results also present a good matching in tern of main trend and value of outflow hydrograph with the Nash coefficient is 0.8.
Xuan Khanh Do et al. / Procedia Engineering 154 ( 2016 ) 990 – 994 993
Right Flow Left Right FlowLeft Right Flow Left
Side bank erosion
Time=350s Time=421s Time=514s
Breach is started Deepening and widening breach Final breach formation
Fig.2 Failure process of landslide dam caused by overtopping
Exp. 1 Right side 20.000 20.000 Observed final breach width 18.000 Initial surface Exp. 380s 18.000 16.000 Exp. 400s Exp. 420s 16.000 Left side 14.000 Exp. 440s Sim. 380s 14.000 12.000 Sim. 400s Sim.420s 12.000 View from downstream 10.000 Sim. 440s 10.000 InitialI surface 8.000 8.000 Sim. 380s Height (cm) Height (cm) 6.000 6.000 Sim. 400s Sim. 420s 4.000 4.000 Sim. 440s 2.000 2.000 Sim.Sim. 700s-700s- FinalFinal sshapehape 0.000 0.000.00 0.00000 10.0010 00 20.0020 00 30.0030 00 40.0040 00 50.0050 00 60.0060 00 70.0070 00 80.0080 00 90.0090 00 0.00000 10.0010 00 20.0020 00 30.0030 00 40.0040 00 50.0050 00 Distance in x direction (cm) Distance in y direction (cm) a) b)
Fig.3 a) Variation of the longitudinal profile; b) evolution of breach at the dam crest position
18000 Obs. Flow discharge 16000 Sim. Flow Discharge 14000
/s) 3 12000
10000
8000
6000
Discharge (cm Discharge Normal supplied 4000 discharge 223cm3/s) 2000 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Time (second)
Fig. 4 Outflow hydrograph 994 Xuan Khanh Do et al. / Procedia Engineering 154 ( 2016 ) 990 – 994
5. Conclusions
This study performed an experiment to describe the failure process of landslide dam having 3D shape by overtopping. The results indicated that the variation of the breach is greatly dependent on the bottom and side bank erosion. The peak discharge caused by landslide dam failure is many times greater than the normal supplied discharge. The proposed model is verified with the observation data and reasonably reproduced the resulting outflow hydrograph. The predicted outflow hydrograph can be used of disaster preparedness. For further study, more experiments with different landslide dam shape and supplied discharge need to be done to create more landslide dam failure scenarios and accurately verify simulated model.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by a grant (11-TI-C06) from the Advanced Water Management Research Program funded by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport of the Korean government.
References
[1] J.E. Costa, R.L. Shuster, The formation and failure of natural dams, Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 100, 1988, pp. 1054-1068. [2] G.F. Wieczorek, Landslide triggering mechanisms, in: Landslides Investigation and Mitigation, edited by: Turner, A. K. and Schuster, R. L., special report 247. National Academy Press, Washington D.C,1996. [3] T. Takahashi, Debris flow, monographs series of IAHR, Balkema, 1991, pp. 1-165. [4] J.E. Costa, Floods from dam failures, U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Rep. No. 85-560, 1985. [5]R. Awal, N. Nakagawa, K. Kawaike, Y. Baba, H. Zhang, Prediction of flood/debris flow hydrograph due to landslide dam failure by overtopping and sliding, Annuals of Disaster Prev. Res. Inst., Kyoto Univ., No. 51B, 2008, pp. 603-611. [6] Z. Cao, Z. Yue, G. Pender, Landslide dam failure and flood hydraulics, Part 2: coupled mathematical modelling, Nat. Hazards, Vol. 59, No. 2, 2011, pp. 1021-1045. [7] Y.Satofuka, T. Mori, T. Mizuyama, K. Ogawa, K. Yoshino, Prediction of floods caused by landslide dam collapse, Journal of disaster research, Vol. 5, No. 3, 2010, pp. 288-295. [8] G.G.D. Zhou, P. Cui, H.Y. Chen, X.H. Zhu, J.B. Tang, Q.C. Sun, Experimental study on cascading landslide dam failures by up stream flows, Landslides, Vol. 10, No. 5, 2013, pp. 633-643. [9] X.K. Do, R.K. Regmi, K.S. Jung, Study on the formation and geometries of rainfall induced landslide dams, KSCE ( revised), 2015. [10] T. Takahashi, H. Nakagawa, Flood/debris flow hydrograph due to collapse of natural dam by overtopping, Journal of Hydro-science and Hydraulic Engineering, JSCE, Vol. 12, No. 2, 1994, pp. 41-49.