4.6 Article

Mechanisms and runout characteristics of the rainfall-triggered debris flow in Xiaojiagou in Sichuan Province, China

Journal

NATURAL HAZARDS
Volume 62, Issue 3, Pages 1037-1057

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11069-012-0133-5

Keywords

Debris flow; Landslide; Water-rock flow; Runout distance; Field investigation; Wenchuan earthquake

Funding

  1. Sichuan Provincial Department of Transportation and Communications
  2. National Basic Research Program of China [2011CB013506]
  3. Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong SAR [622210]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The 2008 Wenchuan earthquake induced a large number of landslides, and a vast amount of loose landslide materials deposited on steep hill slopes or in channels. Such loose materials can become sources of deadly debris flows once triggered by storms. On 13 August 2010, a storm swept Yingxiu and its vicinity, triggering a catastrophic debris flow with a volume of 1.17 million m(3) in Xiaojiagou Ravine. The debris flow buried 1,100 m of road, blocked a river and formed a debris flow barrier lake. A detailed field study was conducted to understand the initiation mechanisms and runout characteristics of this debris flow. Two types of debris flows are identified, namely hill-slope debris flow and channelized debris flow. The hill-slope debris flow was triggered in the forms of firehose effect, rilling and landsliding, whereas the channelized debris flow was triggered in the form of channel-bed failure. This debris flow was a water-rock flow since most particles were gravel, cobble or larger rocks and the fraction of silt and clay was less than 2%. Grain contact friction, pore-pressure effects and inertial grain collision were the three most important physical interactions within the debris flow. Such interactions yielded a smaller runout distance (593 m) compared with those of mud-rock flows of similar size.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available