Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Empirical and analytical analyses of laboratory granular flows to investigate rock avalanche propagation

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Landslides Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Laboratory experiments which consist of releasing dry rigid non-cohesive grains or small bricks on an unconfined chute have been designed to investigate rock avalanche propagation mechanisms and to identify parameters influencing their deposit characteristics. Factors such as volume, fall height, basal friction angle, material used, structure of the material before release, i.e. bricks randomly poured into the reservoir before failure or piled orderly one on top of the other, and type of slope break, i.e. curved or sharp angular, are considered and their influence on apparent friction angle, travel angle of the centre of mass, deposit length and runout is analysed. Results highlight the influence of the structure of the material before release and of the type of transition at the toe of the slope on the mobility of granular avalanches. The more angular and sharp is the slope break, the more shearing (friction) and collisions will develop within the sliding mass as it changes its flow direction, the larger will be the energy dissipation and the shorter will be the travel distance. Shorter runout is also observed when bricks are randomly poured into the reservoir before release compared to when they are piled one on top of the other. In the first case, more energy is dissipated all along the flow through friction and collisions within the mass. Back analysis with a sled block model of experiments with a curved slope break underlines the importance of accounting centripetal acceleration in the modelling of the distance travelled by the centre of mass of a granular mass. This type of model though is not able to assess the spreading of the mass and its total runout because it does not take into account the internal deformation and the transfer of momentum within the mass which, as highlighted by the experimental results, play an important role in the mobility of rock avalanches.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abele G (1974) Bergstürze in den Alpen, ihre Verbreitung, Morphologie und Folgeerscheinungen. Wiss Alpenvereinshefte 25:1–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Abele G (1994) Large rockslides: their causes and movement on internal sliding planes. Mt Res Dev 14(4):315–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell CS (1989) Self-lubrication for long runout landslides. J Geol 97(6):653–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corominas J (1996) The angle of reach as a mobility index for small and large landslides. Can Geotech J 33:260–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies TRH (1982) Spreading of rock avalanche debris by mechanical fluidization. Rock Mech Felsmechanik Mécanique des Roches 15(1):9–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies TRH, McSaveney MJ (1999) Runout of dry granular avalanches. Can Geotech J 36:313–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies TRH, McSaveney MJ (2003) Runout of rock avalanches and volcanic debris avalanches. In: International conference on fast slope movements, Naples, 11–13 May 2003

  • Davies TRH, McSaveney MJ (2009) The role of rock fragmentation in the motion of large landslides. Eng Geol J 109:67–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies TR, McSaveney MJ, Hodgson KA (1999) A fragmentation-spreading model for long-runout rock avalanches. Can Geotech J 36(6):1096–1110

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies T, McSaveney M, Kelfoun K (2010) Runout of the Socompa volcanic debris avalanche, Chile: a mechanical explanation for low basal shear resistance. Bull Volcanol 72(8):933–944

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denlinger RP, Iverson RM (2001) Flow of variably fluidized granular masses across three-dimensional terrain 2. Numerical predictions and experimental tests. J Geophys Res B: Solid Earth 106(B1):553–566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desmangles AI (2003) Extension of the fringe projection method to large object for shape and deformation measurement. Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale, Lausanne

    Google Scholar 

  • Drake TG (1990) Structural features in granular flows. J Geophys Res 95(B6):8681–8696

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drake TG (1991) Granular flow. physical experiments and their implications for microstructural theories. J Fluid Mech 225:121–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erismann TH (1979) Mechanisms of large landslides. Rock Mech Felsmechanik Mécanique des Roches 12(1):15–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedmann SJ, Taberlet N, Losert W (2006) Rock-avalanche dynamics: insights from granular physics experiments. Int J Earth Sci 95(5):911–919. doi:10.1007/s00531-006-0067-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goguel J (1978) Scale-dependent rockslide mechanisms, with emphasis on the role of pore fluid vaporization. Rockslides Avalanches 1:693–705

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heim A (1882) Der Bergsturz von Elm. Z Dtsch Geol Ges 34:74–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim A (1932) Bergsturz und menschenleben. Frets und Wasmuth, Zurich

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsü KJ (1975) Catastrophic debris streams generated by rockfalls. Geol Soc Am Bull 86(I):129–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hungr O (1990) Mobility of rock avalanches. Reports of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, vol 46

  • Hungr O (2002) Rock avalanche motion: process and modeling. In: Proceedings of NATO advanced research workshop, massive rock slope failure: new models for hazard assessment, 2002. 66–69

  • Hungr O, Corominas J, Eberhardt E (2005) Estimating landslide motion mechanism, travel distance and velocity. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Landslide Risk Management. 99–128

  • Iverson RM, Denlinger RP (2001) Flow of variably fluidized granular masses across three-dimensional terrain I. Coulomb mixture theory. J Geophys Res B: Solid Earth 106(B1):537–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iverson RM, Logan M, Denlinger RP (2004) Granular avalanches across irregular three-dimensional terrain: 2. Experimental tests. J Geophys Res 109(F01015):16

    Google Scholar 

  • Kent PE (1966) The transport mechanism in catastrophic rock falls. J Geol 74:79–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legros F (2002) The mobility of long-runout landslides. Eng Geol 63:301–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legros F (2006) Landslide mobility and the role of water. In Landslides from massive rock slope failure. Evans GS, Scarascia Mugnozza G, Strom A, Hermanns LR (eds). NATO Sciences Series, IV. Earth and Environmental Sciences 49:233–242

  • Manzella I (2008) Dry rock avalanche propagation: unconstrained flow experiments with granular materials and blocks at small scale. Ph.D. thesis no. 4032, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, CH

  • Manzella I, Labiouse V (2008a) Qualitative analysis of rock avalanches propagation by means of physical modelling of non-constrained gravel flows. Rock Mech Rock Eng 41(1):133–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manzella I, Labiouse V (2008b) Extension of the fringe projection method to measure shape and position of the centre of mass of granular flow deposit. Invited paper. Proceedings of the 12th IACMAG Conference, October 2008 in Goa, India. 4547−4554

  • Manzella I, Labiouse V (2009) Flow experiments with gravel and blocks at small scale to investigate parameters and mechanisms involved in rock avalanches. Eng Geol J 109:146–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manzella I, Labiouse V (2010) Physical modelling to better understand rock avalanches. Physical Modelling in Geotechnics—2010 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-0-415-59288-8 V.2:1259-1265

    Google Scholar 

  • Massey BS (1983) Mechanics of fluids. Van Nostrand Reinhold (UK) Co. Ltd

  • McDougall S (2006) A new continuum dynamic model for the analysis of extremely rapid landslide motion across complex 3D terrain. University of British Columbia, Vancouver

    Google Scholar 

  • McDougall S, Hungr O (2004) A model for the analysis of rapid landslide motion across three-dimensional terrain. Can Geotech J 41(6):1084–1097

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melosh HJ (1979) Acoustic fluidization—new geologic process. J Geophys Res 84(NB13):7513–7520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okura Y, Kitahara H, Sammori T (2000a) Fluidization in dry landslides. Eng Geol 56:347–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okura Y, Kitahara H, Sammori T, Kawanami A (2000b) The effects of rockfall volume on runout distance. Eng Geol 58(2):109–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pudasaini SP, Hutter K (2007) Avalanche dynamics: dynamics of rapid flows of dense granular avalanches

  • Sassa K (1988) Special lecture: geotechnical model for the motion of landslides. In: Landslides. Proc. 5th symposium, Lausanne, 1988, Lausanne, 1988. 37–55

  • Sauthier C (In progress) Physical and numerical modelling of the propagation and spreading of dry rock avalanches. Ph.D. thesis in progress, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, CH

  • Scheidegger AE (1973) On the prediction of the reach and velocity of catastrophic landslides. Rock Mech Felsmechanik Mécanique des Roches 5(4):231–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shreve RL (1968) The Blackhawk landslide. Geol Soc Am, Spec Pap 108:1–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Gassen W, Cruden DM (1989) Momentum transfer and friction in the debris of rock avalanches. Can Geotech J 26(4):623–628. doi:10.1139/t89-075

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voight B, Sousa J (1994) Lessons from Ontake-san: a comparative analysis of debris avalanche dynamics. Eng Geol 38(3–4):261–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voight B, Janda RJ, Glicken H, Douglass PM (1983) Nature and mechanics of the Mount St-Helens rockslide-avalanche of 18 May 1980. Geotechnique 33(3):243–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang Q, Cai F, Ugai K, Yamada M, Su Z, Ahmed A, Huang R, Xu Q (2011) Some factors affecting mass-front velocity of rapid dry granular flows in a large flume. Eng Geol J 122:249–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors thank the Canton of Valais, the OFEG and the SECO for funding. Further acknowledgements go to Professor Pierre Jacquot and Steve Cochard for the development of the fringe projection method, to Sophie Desprez and Marina Rossetti for the help given during their traineeship, to Jean-Marc Terraz and Laurent Gastaldo for the model development. Dr. Manzella would like to thank Professor Costanza Bonadonna for fruitful discussions.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Irene Manzella

    Present address: Section de Sciences de la Terre et de l’Environnement, Université de Genève, Genève, Switzerland

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Rock Mechanics Laboratory, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Irene Manzella & Vincent Labiouse

Authors
  1. Irene Manzella
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vincent Labiouse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Irene Manzella.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Manzella, I., Labiouse, V. Empirical and analytical analyses of laboratory granular flows to investigate rock avalanche propagation. Landslides 10, 23–36 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-011-0313-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-011-0313-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation