4.7 Article

Effects of bed permeability and roughness on the mobility of submarine debris flows: experimental insights

期刊

LANDSLIDES
卷 20, 期 3, 页码 497-510

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s10346-022-02005-3

关键词

Submarine debris flows; Physical modeling; Boundary conditions; Flow mobility

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Submarine debris flows pose a threat to offshore development. Existing experimental studies do not accurately simulate actual bed conditions, and recent experiments have shown that bed roughness and permeability play an important role in flow dynamics.
Submarine debris flows pose a threat to offshore development. Field evidence shows that these flows travel on sandy beds that are rough and permeable. However, existing experimental studies idealize bed conditions as smooth and impermeable. A series of experiments were carried out to investigate the effects of bed roughness and permeability on the prevailing flow dynamics. Experimental results show that excess water pressures at the flow-bed interface of hydroplaning flows are mainly caused by dynamic pressure as debris moves against the ambient fluid. In contrast, excess water pressures at the flow-bed interface for non-hydroplaning debris flows are caused by rapid loading on a sandy bed. Excess pressures from rapid loading provide another explanation for the long travel distances of submarine debris flows. Permeable beds provide an additional path for the diffusion of fluid pressures at the flow-bed interface, which increase bed normal stresses and decelerate a flow. Bed permeability and roughness are observed to regulate the bipartite flow dynamics (i.e., turbidity current overlying dense laminar layers). Findings suggest that existing thresholds used to describe the onset of hydroplaning may only be relevant for smooth and impermeable beds and hydroplaning alone may be insufficient to explain the high mobility of submarine debris flows if more realistic boundary conditions are considered.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据