Exploring single and sequential debris flow impacts against solid and slit barriers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Landslide barrier structures are a useful mitigation tool for managing debris flow risks, working to slow their momentum or alter their course to avoid damage to downslope inhabitants or infrastructure. Their design is typically governed by the expected impact force, which is predicted using analytical models or numerical simulations. These methods only provide estimates of the peak force and require detailed information about the flow at impact that can be difficult to accurately predict. In this experimental study, we use the large Queen’s University Landslide Flume to explore the relative contributions of the fluid and solid phases of a multi-phase flow on the structural demand on a barrier. Impact forces following dam break experiments of up to 0.4 m3 of material, released from the top of a 6.5 m long slope inclined at 30 degrees are explored for material releases of pure water, dry granular particles (3 mm diameter), and fully saturated water-grain mixtures. Temporal impact behaviour captured using ultrahigh speed imaging (7500 fps) is correlated with the time series of impact load measured at the barrier. The addition of the fluid phase was found to significantly increase the impact force and the maximum run-up height along the barrier. Further tests are performed using single-graded particles ranging in diameter from 3-25 mm. Over this range, the dilatancy of the flow increased with increasing particle size, leading to reduced influence of the fluid phase on the flow dynamics and decreased impact force, despite similar flow velocities (4-5 m/s).To explore the performance of an alternate barrier type, impact tests were conducted using a single-slit barrier with varying slit size (30-240 mm) and grain diameter (3-25 mm), providing a wide range of relative slit sizes. A benefit of the slit barrier design is its ability to ‘self-clean,’ letting material slowly release through the slit following an impact event. This allows the barrier to remain effective in halting a secondary debris flow without maintenance clearing between impacts. To explore the dynamics of this subsequent event, secondary releases were performed for both solid and slit barrier designs. Barrier performance is investigated using load measurement, LiDAR imaging, and PIV analysis. The solid barrier experienced overtopping under the second release. The addition of the slit alters the deposit geometry, generating two slopes on either slide of the slit which act as redirection berms, altering the flow behaviour and reducing the runup height and force of the second impact. The results of this large-scale experimental study provide detailed data on the flow behaviour, impact mechanics, and barrier efficiency for a range of debris flow compositions, particle sizes, and slit sizes under single and sequential impacts, suitable for numerical model benchmark tests that may lead to improved barrier design.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".