Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-zlgnt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T04:36:02.979Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Simulating glacial lake outburst floods with a two-phase mass flow model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2016

Parameshwari Kattel ,
Khim B. Khattri ,
Puskar R. Pokhrel ,
Jeevan Kafle ,
Bhadra Man Tuladhar  and
Shiva P. Pudasaini
Parameshwari Kattel*
Affiliation:
School of Science, Kathmandu University, Dhulikhel, Kavre, Nepal Department of Mathematics, Tri-Chandra Multiple Campus, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal
Khim B. Khattri
Affiliation:
School of Science, Kathmandu University, Dhulikhel, Kavre, Nepal
Puskar R. Pokhrel
Affiliation:
School of Science, Kathmandu University, Dhulikhel, Kavre, Nepal Department of Mathematics, R.R. Campus, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal
Jeevan Kafle
Affiliation:
School of Science, Kathmandu University, Dhulikhel, Kavre, Nepal Department of Mathematics, Valmiki Campus, Nepal Sanskrit University, Kathmandu, Nepal
Bhadra Man Tuladhar
Affiliation:
School of Science, Kathmandu University, Dhulikhel, Kavre, Nepal
Shiva P. Pudasaini
Affiliation:
Department of Geophysics, Steinmann Institute, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
*
Correspondence: Parameshwari Kattel, <pkattel@student.ku.edu.np>
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

To simulate a glacial lake outburst flood, we employ a comprehensive physically based general two-phase mass flow model (Pudasaini, 2012). This model accounts for a strong interaction between the solid and fluid phases and incorporates buoyancy and other dominant physical aspects of the mass flows such as enhanced non-Newtonian viscous stress, virtual mass force and generalized drag. Our real two-phase mass flow simulation describes explicit evolution of the solid and fluid phases and the debris bulk as a whole, akin to torrential debris flows or debris floods during glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs). The emptying of a lake following rapid collapse of a restraining dam, the consequent downslope motion of a mixed solid–fluid mass, and the tendency of the mass to form extruding plumes are analyzed in detail for different flow configurations, volumes, conduit geometries and boundary conditions. The solid and fluid phases evolve completely differently and reveal fundamentally different dynamical behaviours. During the flow, the relatively long fluid tail follows the solid-rich dense frontal surge head. The bulk debris develops into a frontal and side levee as derived from the initial frontal moraine dam. Results show that our high-resolution, unified simulation strategies and the advanced model equations can be applied to study the flow dynamics of a wide range of geophysical mass flows such as snow and rock–ice avalanches, debris flows and flash floods as well as GLOFs. This may help substantially in forming a basis for appropriate mitigation measures against potential natural hazards in high mountain slopes and valleys.

Keywords

applied glaciologyjökulhlaups (GLOFs)

Information

Type
Paper
Information
Annals of Glaciology , Volume 57 , Issue 71 , March 2016 , pp. 349 - 358
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2016

References

Awal, R, Nakagawa, H, Fujita, M, Kawaike, K, Baba, Y and Zhang, H (2010) Experimental study on glacial lake outburst floods due to waves overtopping and erosion of moraine dam. Annu. Disaster Prev. Res. Inst. Kyoto Univ., 53B, 583–594 Google Scholar
Bagnold, RA (1954) Experiments on a gravity-free dispersion of large solid spheres in a Newtonian fluid under shear. Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 225, 49–63 Google Scholar
Braat, L (2014) Debris flows on Mars: an experimental analysis. (Master thesis, University of Utrecht)Google Scholar
Breien, H, De Bkasio, FV, Elverhoi, A and Hoeg, K (2008) Erosion and morphology of a debris flow caused by a glacial lake outburst flood, Western Norway. Landslides, 5, 271–280 (doi: 10.1007/s10346-008-0118-3)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cageao, PP, Turnbull, B and Bartelt, P (2013) Experiments on the dynamics of subaerial two-phase debris flows. Geophys. Res. Abstr., 15, EGU2013-9254-2Google Scholar
Chen, CL (1988) Generalized viscoplastic modelling of debris flow. J. Hydraul. Res., 114(3), 237–258 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandez-Nieto, ED, Bouchut, F, Bresch, D, Castro Daz, MJ and Mangeney, A (2008) A new Savage–Hutter type model for submarine avalanches and generated tsunami. J. Comput. Phys., 227(16), 7720–7754 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, JMNT, Wieland, M and Hutter, K (1999) Gravity-driven free surface flow of granular avalanches over complex basal topography. Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 455, 1841–1874 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hungr, O (1995) A model for the run out analysis of rapid flow slides, debris flows, and avalanches. Can. Geotech. J., 32, 610–623 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutter, K, Svendsen, B and Rickenmann, D (1996) Debris flow modelling review. Contin. Mech. Thermodyn., 8, 1–35 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) (2011) Glacial lakes and glacial lake outburst floods in Nepal. International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, Kathmandu Google Scholar
Iverson, RM (1997) The physics of debris flows. Rev. Geophys., 35(3), 245–296 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iverson, RM and Denlinger, RP (2001) Flow of variably fluidized granular masses across three-dimensional terrain: 1. Coulomb mixture theory. J. Geophys. Res., 106(B1), 537–552 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, AM (1965) A model for debris flow. (PhD dissertation, Pennsylvania State University)Google Scholar
Johnson, CG, Kokelaar, BP, Iversion, RM, Logan, M, LaHusen, RG and Gray, JMNT (2012) Grainsize segregation and levee formation in geophysical mass flows J. Geophys. Res., 117, F01032 (doi: 10.1029/2011JF002185)Google Scholar
Kafle, J (2014) Dynamic interaction between a two-phase submarine landslide and a fluid reservoir. (MPhil dissertation, Kathmandu University)Google Scholar
Kattel, P (2014) Dynamics of quasi-three-dimensional and twophase mass flows. (MPhil dissertation, Kathmandu University)Google Scholar
Khattri, KB (2014) Sub-diffusive and sub-advective viscous fluid flows in debris and porous media. (MPhil dissertation, Kathmandu University)Google Scholar
Lecomte, I, Thollet, I, Juliussen, H and Hamran, SE (2008) Using geophysics on a terminal moraine damming a glacial lake: the Flatbre debris flow case, Western Norway. Adv. Geosci., 14, 301–307 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Major, J and Iverson, RM (1999) Debris-flow deposition: effects of pore-fluid pressure and friction concentrated at flow margins. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 110, 1424–1434 2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McArdell, BW, Bartelt, P and Kowalski, J (2007) Field observations of basal forces and fluid pore pressure in a debris flow. Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, 2009–2039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nessyahu, H and Tadmor, E (1990) Non-oscillatory central differencing for hyperbolic conservation laws. J. Comput. Phys., 87(2), 408–463 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’brien, JS, Julien, PY and Fullerton, WT (1993) Two-dimensional water flood and mud flow simulation. J. Hydraul. Eng., 119(2), 244–261 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pitman, EB and Le, L (2005) A two fluid model for avalanche and debris flows. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A, 363(3), 1573–1601 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pokhrel, PR (2014) General phase-eigenvalues for two-phase mass flows: supercritical and subcritical states. (MPhil dissertation, Kathmandu University)Google Scholar
Pudasaini, SP (2012) A general two-phase debris flow model. J. Geophys. Res., 117, F03010 (doi: 10.1029/2011JF002186)Google Scholar
Pudasaini, SP (2014) Dynamics of submarine debris flow and tsunami. Acta Mech., 225, 2423–2434 (doi: 10.1007/s00707-014-1126-0)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pudasaini, SP and Hutter, K (2003) Rapid shear flows of dry granular masses down curved and twisted channels. J. Fluid Mech., 495, 193–208 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pudasaini, SP and Hutter, K (2007) Avalanche dynamics: dynamics of rapid flows of dense granular avalanches. Springer, Berlin and New York Google Scholar
Pudasaini, SP and Krautblatter, M (2014) A two-phase mechanical model for rock–ice avalanches. J. Geophys. Res. Earth Surf., 119(10), 2272–2290 (doi: 10.1002/2014JF003183)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pudasaini, SP and Miller, SA (2013) The hypermobility of huge landslides and avalanches. Eng. Geol., 157, 124–132 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pudasaini, SP, Wang, Y and Hutter, K (2005) Modelling debris flows down general channels. Natur. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 5, 799–819 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage, SB and Hutter, K (1989) The motion of a finite mass of granular material down a rough incline. J. Fluid Mech., 199, 177–215 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, D, Huggel, C, Haeberli, W and Kaitna, R (2011) Unraveling driving factors for large rock–ice avalanche mobility. Earth Surf. Process. Landf., 36(14), 1948–1966 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takahashi, T (1991) Debris flow. (IAHR-AIRH Monograph Series A) Balkema, Rotterdam Takahashi, T (2007) Debris flow: mechanics, prediction and countermeasures. Taylor and Francis, New York Google Scholar
Worni, R, Stoffel, M, Huggel, C, Volz, C, Casteller, A and Luckman, B (2012) Analysis and dynamic modelling of a moraine failure and glacier lake outburst flood at Ventisquero Negro, Patagonian Andes (Argentina). J. Hydrol., 444–445, 134–145 CrossRefGoogle Scholar