Skip to main content

FORECASTING RUNOUT OF ROCK AND DEBRIS AVALANCHES

  • Conference paper
Landslides from Massive Rock Slope Failure

Part of the book series: NATO Science Series ((NAIV,volume 49))

  • 5829 Accesses

Abstract

Physically based mathematical models and statistically based empirical equations each may provide useful means of forecasting runout of rock and debris avalanches. This paper compares the foundations, strengths, and limitations of a physically based model and a statistically based forecasting method, both of which were developed to predict runout across three-dimensional topography. The chief advantage of the physically based model results from its ties to physical conservation laws and well-tested axioms of soil and rock mechanics, such as the Coulomb friction rule and effective-stress principle. The output of this model provides detailed information about the dynamics of avalanche runout, at the expense of high demands for accurate input data, numerical computation, and experimental testing. In comparison, the statistical method requires relatively modest computation and no input data except identification of prospective avalanche source areas and a range of postulated avalanche volumes. Like the physically based model, the statistical method yields maps of predicted runout, but it provides no information on runout dynamics. Although the two methods differ significantly in their structure and objectives, insights gained from one method can aid refinement of the other.

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

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dade, W.B., and Huppert, H.E. (1998) Long-runout rockfalls, Geology 26, 803–806.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Davies, T.R.H. (1982) Spreading of rock avalanche debris by mechanical fluidization, Rock Mech. 15, 9–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Denlinger, R.P., and Iverson, R.M. (2001) Flow of variably fluidized granular masses across threedimensional terrain: 2. Numerical predictions and experimental tests, J. Geophys. Res. 106 B, 553–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Gray, J.M.N.T.,Wieland, M., and Hutter, K. (1999) Gravity driven free surface flow of granular avalanches over complex basal topography, Proc. Roy. Soc. London, Ser. A. 455, 1841–1874.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Heim, A. (1932) Bergsturz und Menschenleben, Fretz and Wasmuth, Zürich.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hungr, O. (1990) Mobility of rock avalanches, Report of the National Research Center for Disaster Prevention (Japan) 46, 11–19.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hungr, O. (1995) A model for the runout analysis of rapid flow slides, debris flows, and avalanches, Can. Geotech. J. 32, 610–623.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hutchinson, J.N. (1986) A sliding-consolidation model for flow slides, Can. Geotech. J. 23, 115–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Iverson, R.M. (1997) The physics of debris flows, Rev. Geophys. 35, 245–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Iverson, R.M. (2003) How should mathematical models of geomorphic processes be judged? in P.R. Wilcock and R.M. Iverson (eds.) Prediction in Geomorphology, Geophys. Monograph 135, American Geophysical Union, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Iverson, R.M., and Denlinger, R.P. (2001) Flow of variably fluidized granular masses across threedimensional terrain: 1. Coulomb mixture theory, J. Geophys. Res. 106 B, 537–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Iverson, R.M. Schilling, S.P., and Vallance, J.W. (1998) Objective delineation of lahar-inundation hazard zones, Geol. Soc. Amer. Bull. 110, 972–984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Iverson, R.M., and Vallance, J.W. (2001) New views of granular mass flows, Geology 29, 115–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kilburn, C.R.J., and Sørensen, S-A. (1998) Runout lengths of struzstroms: the control of initial conditions and of fragment dynamics, J. Geophys. Res. 103 B, 17877–17884.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Li Tianchi (1983) A mathematical model for predicting the extent of a major rockfall, Ziets. Geomorph. 27, 473–482.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Reid, M.E., Sisson, T.W., and Brien, D.L. (2001) Volcano collapse promoted by hydrothermal alteration and edifice shape, Mount Rainier, Washington, Geology 29, 779–782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Savage, S.B., and Hutter, K. (1989) The motion of a finite mass of granular material down a rough incline, J. Fluid Mech. 199, 177–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Savage, S.B., and Hutter, K. (1991) The dynamics of avalanches of granular materials from initiation to runout, Part I. analysis, Acta Mechanica 86, 201–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Schilling, S.P. (1998) LAHARZ: GIS programs for automated delineation of lahar hazard zones, U.S. Geol. Sur. Open-file Rep. 98–638.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Vallance, J.W., and Scott, K.M. (1997) The Osceola mudflow from Mount Rainier: sedimentology and hazards implications of a huge clay-rich debris flow, Geol. Soc. Amer. Bull. 109, 143–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Vreugdenhil, C.B. (1994) Numerical Methods for Shallow-Water Flow, Kluwer, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer

About this paper

Cite this paper

IVERSON, R. (2006). FORECASTING RUNOUT OF ROCK AND DEBRIS AVALANCHES. In: Evans, S.G., Mugnozza, G.S., Strom, A., Hermanns, R.L. (eds) Landslides from Massive Rock Slope Failure. NATO Science Series, vol 49. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4037-5_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics