the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Numerical analysis of dynamics between debris flows and wave propagation using multi-layer shallow water equations
Abstract. Landslides and debris flows are significant disasters that frequently occur on hillslopes, often resulting in casualties and property damage when they take place near residential areas. Specifically, in regions with dams or reservoirs, landslides and debris flows can raise the top of dead storage, reducing the effective storage capacity of these facilities. Additionally, debris flows entering reservoirs can generate tsunami-type waves, potentially leading to overflow-induced flooding and the collapse of hydraulic structures. Numerical modeling has been widely employed to mitigate such disasters. However, most studies utilized three-dimensional hydrodynamics or smoothed particle hydrodynamics, focusing primarily on laboratory-scale events without considering critical processes such as erosion, entrainment, and deposition. These processes are essential for accurately simulating debris flow dynamics. To address these limitations, this study developed a multi-layer dynamics simulation model based on shallow water equations that consider erosion, entrainment, and deposition mechanics, enabling the analysis of field-scale events. The model's performance was validated through theoretical and laboratory experiments. The 2020 Sanyang Reservoir collapse event in South Korea was selected as a case study to evaluate the model's applicability. Scenario-based analyses were conducted, considering debris flow characteristics and reservoir water level conditions, to explore various potential outcomes. The results highlighted the correlation between debris flow momentum and wave scale, with the maximum momentum of the debris flow identified as a strong predictor of the wave's magnitude.
- Preprint
(5001 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(4896 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (extended)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-1383', Anonymous Referee #1, 12 Sep 2025
reply
General comments:
Landslides or debris flows rushing into reservoirs can cause surges and pose damage to dams. The manuscript uses the so-called multi-layer shallow water equations to model the interaction between debris flows and water, and numerically solves them using 1-D FVM. Although the model and method is verified in the experiments and the simulation of the 2020 Sanyang Reservoir collapse event, there are some issues that need to be considered. First, the authors mention landslides and debris flows in the introduction and aim to study the reservoir collapse event caused by landslide–debris flows. Landslides and debris flows are two different kinds of mass movements that may describe by different equations. In the left part, the authors only establish the governing equations of debris flows. Second, there is a distinct interface between debris flows and their intruding water in an ideal scenario. In most cases, debris flows would mix strongly with water. The interface between layers is not clear, and the multi-layer model has limited capability to analyze the dynamic process. Third, the novelty is not enough and the conclusions are trivial.. 1-D dimensional simulation and conventional algorithm FVM are common. Assumption of the constant erosion and deposition rates is simple. Overall, the manuscript presents a conventional study and can be improved greatly by addressing these issues.
Specific comments:
1. Introduction: What is the meaning of “landslide-debris flow”? landslide and debris flow, or debris flow transformed from landslide?
2. Introduction: “Despite the potential for large-scale complex hazards caused by landslide–debris flow events in dam/reservoir basins, they have received less attention and research than urban areas.” I disagree with it. There are many studies and references related to this subject.
3. Introduction: “without considering critical processes such as erosion, entrainment, and deposition”?? Many studies consider erosion, entrainment, and deposition, such as Cao, Z., Pender, G., Wallis, S., & Carling, P. (2004). Computational dam-break hydraulics over erodible sediment bed. Journal of hydraulic engineering, 130(7), 689-703. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2004)13; Iverson, R. M., & Ouyang, C. (2015). Entrainment of bed material by Earth‐surface mass flows: Review and reformulation of depth‐integrated theory. Reviews of geophysics, 53(1), 27-58. https:// doi.org/10.1002/2013 RG000447; Pudasaini, S. P., & Fischer, J. T. (2020). A mechanical erosion model for two-phase mass flows. International Journal of Multiphase Flow, 132, 103416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmultiphaseflow.2020.103416.; Baggio, T., Mergili, M., & D'Agostino, V. (2021). Advances in the simulation of debris flow erosion: The case study of the Rio Gere (Italy) event of the 4th August 2017. Geomorphology, 381, 107664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2021.107664
4. P4: Eq.1, Is the x direction normal with the slope or vertical with the earth surface? What is z in the last term? Bed elevation?
5. P4: Eq.1 Why does the momentum equation of debris flow not include the loss or gain of momentum due to erosion or deposition.
6. P6: The authors describe their numerical scheme in three pages. If the UDCHR scheme are the same with the original reference, maybe the authors could make this section more concise.
7. P6: “the constant erosion-entrainment rate; dz/dtd is the constant deposition rate” The erosion-entrainment rate is not constant. It depends flow depth, velocity, and other factors such as channel slope, bed composition.
8. P11: Voellmy miu = 0.15, zeta = 50, fint = 10. “In this context, the value of zeta is significantly lower than those used in previous studies while fint is notably higher”. Why is the value significantly lower than previous studies? How to explain it?
9. Table 1: how to determine the values of tau_e and tau_d? how to get the density of debris flows? By field survey?
10. Figure 4: The labels (a) (b) should be fig5.a, fig5.b. What kinds of the dam? It looks like an earthen dam.
11. From Figure 4 and 5, there are actually traces of bank landslides. But we are not sure whether the debris flows happened. Can you provide more pictures or evidence?
12. L295: Figures 8a and 8b? maybe Figures 5a and 5b.
13. Figure 6c: it is longitudinal section, not cross-section.
14. L315: Are all of slopes > 40 degree the landslide area?
15. L325: how to determine the initial depth or volume of debris flows?Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1383-RC1
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
392 | 81 | 12 | 485 | 34 | 9 | 27 |
- HTML: 392
- PDF: 81
- XML: 12
- Total: 485
- Supplement: 34
- BibTeX: 9
- EndNote: 27
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1