Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Z.C. Kang, Z.F. Li, A.N. Ma (2004)
Study on debris flows in China
(1972)
SCS National Engineering Handbook, Section 4. Hydrology, Soil Conservation Service
X. Hua (2005)
Study on Spatially Distributed Hydrological Model Based on Routing Time MethodJournal of Wuhan University of Technology
F. Yu, C. Chen, Tien-Chien Chen, Feng-Yi Hung, S. Lin (2006)
A GIS Process for Delimitating Areas Potentially Endangered by Debris FlowNatural Hazards, 37
M. Berti, A. Simoni (2005)
Experimental evidences and numerical modelling of debris flow initiated by channel runoffLandslides, 2
Chao-Sheng Tang, Jing Zhu, Weile Li, J. Liang (2009)
Rainfall-triggered debris flows following the Wenchuan earthquakeBulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 68
M. Bisson, M. Favalli, A. Fornaciai, F. Mazzarini, I. Isola, G. Zanchetta, M. Pareschi (2005)
A rapid method to assess fire-related debris flow hazard in the Mediterranean region: An example from Sicily (southern Italy)International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 7
R. Iverson (1997)
The physics of debris flowsReviews of Geophysics, 35
E. Brater, H. King (1976)
Handbook of Hydraulics for the Solution of Hydraulic Engineering Problems
K.H. Hu, F.Q. Wei, Y.P. He (2003)
Application of particle model in risk zoning of debris flowsJournal of Mountain Sciences, 21
Jin-feng Liu, Y. You, Xingchang Chen, Jian-rong Fan (2010)
Identification of potential sites of debris flows in the upper Min River drainage, following environmental changes caused by the Wenchuan earthquakeJournal of Mountain Science, 7
Wei 韦方强, Hu KH(胡凯衡), L. Jl, Cui P(崔鹏) (2003)
Method and its application of the momentum model for debris flow risk zoningChinese Science Bulletin, 48
He Yi-ping (2003)
Application of Particle Model in Risk Zoning of Debris FlowJournal of Mountain Research
Guangqian Wang, Songdong Shao, Xiangjun Fei (1997)
Particle Model for Alluvial Fan Formation
G.Q. Wang, S.D. Song, X.J. Fei (1998)
Debris flow simulation:ImodelJournal of Sediment Research, 43
Kai-heng Hu, P. Cui, Chuanchang Wang, Yong Li, Xiaobing Lu (2010)
Characteristic rainfall for warning of debris flowsJournal of Mountain Science, 7
Chen Yong, D. Booth (2011)
The Wenchuan earthquake
P. Cui (1992)
STUDY ON CONDITIONS AND MECHANISMS OF DEBRIS FLOW INITIATION BY MEANS OF EXPERIMENT, 37
J.S. Wu, L.Q. Tian, Z.C. Kang (1993)
Debris flow and its comprehensive control
S. Montes (1998)
Hydraulics of open channel flow
G. Wang, S. Shao, X. Fei (1997)
Debris flows Hazard Mitigation: Mechanics, Prediction, and Assessment, Proceeding of the First International DFHM Conference, San Francisco, CA, USA, August 7?9
P. Aleotti (2004)
A warning system for rainfall-induced shallow failuresEngineering Geology, 73
Zhou Xiao-jun (2010)
Characteristics and Countermeasures of Debris Flow in Wenchuan Area After the EarthquakeJournal of Sichuan University
Debris flows have caused serious human casualties and economic losses in the regions strongly affected by the Ms8.0 Wenchuan earthquake of 2008. Debris flow mitigation and risk assessment is a key issue for reconstruction. The existing methods of inundation simulation are based on historical disasters and have no power of prediction. The rainflood method can not yield detailed flow hydrograph and does not meet the need of inundation simulation. In this paper, the process of water flow was studied by using the Arc-SCS model combined with hydraulic method, and then the debris flow runoff process was calculated using the empirical formula combining the result from Arc-SCS. The peak discharge and runoff duration served as input of inundation simulation. Then, the dangerous area is predicted using kinematic wave method and Manning equation. Taking the debris flow in Huashiban gully in Beichuan County, Sichuan Province, China on 24 Sep. 2008 as example, the peak discharge of water flow and debris flow were calculated as 35.52 m3·s−1 and 215.66 m3·s−, with error of 4.15% compared to the measured values. The simulated area of debris-flow deposition was 161,500 m2, vs. the measured area of 144,097 m2, in error of 81.75%. The simulated maximum depth was 12.3 m, consistent with the real maximum depth between 10 and 15 m according to the field survey. The minor error is mainly due to the flow impact on buildings and variations in cross-section configuration. The present methodology can be applied to predict debris flow magnitude and evaluate its risk in other watersheds inthe earthquake area.
Journal of Mountain Science – Springer Journals
Published: Feb 19, 2011
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.