基于离心试验与离散元模拟的滑坡碎屑流冲击效应研究

张贝; 黄雨

doi:10.11779/CJGE20230304

基于离心试验与离散元模拟的滑坡碎屑流冲击效应研究 English Version

张贝^{1, 2,},
黄雨^2, ,

1.
长安大学地质工程与测绘学院, 陕西西安 710054
2.
同济大学土木工程学院地下建筑与工程系, 上海 200092

基金项目:

国家自然科学基金重点项目 41831291

详细信息

作者简介:
张贝(1994—)，男，主要从事滑坡碎屑流致灾效应方面的研究工作。E-mail: beizhang@chd.edu.cn

通讯作者:
黄雨, E-mail: yhuang@tongji.edu.cn

中图分类号: TU43
计量
- 文章访问数: 0
- HTML全文浏览量: 0
- PDF下载量: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2023-04-08
- 网络出版日期: 2023-07-02
- 刊出日期: 2024-06-30

Impact effects of debris avalanches based on centrifuge modeling and DEM simulation

ZHANG Bei^{1, 2,},
HUANG Yu^2, ,

1.
College of Geological Engineering and Geomatics, Chang'an University, Xi'an 710054, China
2.
Department of Geotechnical Engineering, College of Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China

摘要

摘要: 滑坡碎屑流物质组成的复杂性造成其对工程结构的冲击效应尚未被完全理解，特别是粒径大小与级配特征如何影响冲击力及其组成，以及拦挡结构设计中如何考虑粒径特征的影响，当前仍缺乏深入的研究。针对这些问题，开展了一系列离心试验与离散元模拟分析，研究结果表明滑坡碎屑流的颗粒粒径控制着冲击力的波动行为，即随着粒径的增大，总冲击力的峰值越来越明显，且伴随着显著的离散冲击力值。小粒径颗粒对大粒径颗粒存在明显缓冲效应，且小颗粒在冲击过程中更容易进入大颗粒的孔隙，进而贡献作用力，因此粒径和级配特征同时控制着冲击力的绝对值。不同粒径特征控制着颗粒尺度上动量传递机制，进而改变了滑坡碎屑流的冲击效应，由此造成冲击动压力系数 $\alpha$ 随着Savage数的增大基本上呈现出递增的关系，因此建议采用Froude数与Savage数作为双控指标，辅助确定冲击动压力系数 $\alpha$ 。此外，通过分析冲击力合力作用位置，发现工程设计中可按总冲击力峰值及矩形分布荷载进行考虑。
- 滑坡碎屑流 /
- 冲击效应 /
- 拦挡结构 /
- 离心模拟 /
- 离散元模拟
Abstract: The complexity of the material composition of debris avalanches results in the impact effects on engineering structures not being completely understood. In particular, how the particle size and distribution characteristics affect the impact force and its composition and how to consider the influences of characteristics of particle size in the design of barrier structures still lack in-depth researches. To answer these questions, a series of centrifuge modeling tests and DEM simulation tests are conducted. The results indicate that the particle size dominates the fluctuation behaviors of the impact force of the debris avalanche, and with the increasing particle size, the peaks become increasingly obvious, accompanied by a significant discrete impact force. The smaller particles show an obvious cushion-effect to larger particles, and they more easily enter into the void formed by larger particles and interact with the barrier, thus contributing to the total impact force. Therefore, both the particle size and the distribution characteristics control the absolute value of the impact force. The particle characteristics determine the momentum transfer mechanism at the particle scale and thus the impact effects. For this reason, it is found that the dynamic impact pressure coefficient $\alpha$ shows an increasing trend with the increasing Savage number of debris avalanches. Thus, it is suggested that the Froude number and Savage number should be jointly used to select appropriate $\alpha$ . In addition, based on the analysis of the acting point of the resultant impact force, we suggest that in engineering design, the total impact force combined with the rectangular distribution mode can be adopted for safety.
- debris avalanche /
- impact effect /
- barrier structure /
- centrifuge modeling /
- DEM simulation

HTML全文

图 1 离心试验装置整体配置图、试验装置尺寸设置图及试验材料

Figure 1. (a) Configuration of centrifuge model; (b) dimension of centrifuge model; (c) testing materials

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 离散元模型设置

Figure 2. Setup of DEM model

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 PM4滑坡碎屑流的冲击过程：（a1~a4）离心试验图像；（b1~b4）PIV分析结果

Figure 3. Impact process of PM4 case: (a1~a4) centrifuge results; (b1~b2) PIV analysis results

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 PM4工况滑坡碎屑流冲击压力的4次重复试验结果

Figure 4. Impact pressure results of four repeated tests of debris avalanche of PM4 case

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 单分散滑坡碎屑流总冲击力以及单个粒子冲击力最大值

Figure 5. Total impact forces and maximum forces generated by single particle within debris avalanches with monodisperse particle characteristics

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 单分散滑坡碎屑流冲击力动态和静态分量

Figure 6. Dynamic and static components of impact force of debris avalanches with monodisperse particle characteristic

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 双分散滑坡碎屑流总冲击力以及单个粒子冲击力最大值

Figure 7. Dynamic and static components of impact force of debris avalanches with bidisperse particle characteristics

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 双分散滑坡碎屑流不同粒径组分的总冲击力（坡度为45°）

Figure 8. Total impact forces of component with different particle sizes (slope angle of 45°)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 单分散滑坡碎屑流冲击力合力作用位置

Figure 9. Acting point of resultant impact force of debris avalanches with monodisperse particle characteristic

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 双分散滑坡碎屑流冲击力合力作用位置

Figure 10. Acting points of resultant impact force of debris avalanches with bidisperse particle characteristics

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

冲击动压力系数 $\alpha$ 与Savage数的关系

Relationship between dynamic impact pressure coefficient $\alpha$ and Savage number

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 离心试验滑体试样的粒径特征与物理性质

Table 1 Particle characteristics and physical properties of test materials used in centrifuge modeling

粒径级配	最小干密度 ${\rho _{{\text{d}}\_\min }}$ /(g·cm^-3)	最大干密度 ${\rho _{{\text{d}}\_\max }}$ /(g·cm^-3)	内摩擦角/(°)		界面摩擦角/(°)
粒径级配	最小干密度 ${\rho _{{\text{d}}\_\min }}$ /(g·cm^-3)	最大干密度 ${\rho _{{\text{d}}\_\max }}$ /(g·cm^-3)	圆锥试验	溃坝试验	界面摩擦角/(°)
PM1(0.1~0.5 mm)	1.28	1.63	31	28	20
PM2 (0.5~1 mm)	1.34	1.62	30	27	20
PM3 (1~2 mm)	1.37	1.60	31	27	19
PM4 (2~4 mm)	1.37	1.56	31	30	18
PB1	1.29	1.64	30	29	19
PB2	1.35	1.55	31	30	18

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 离散元模拟工况设置

Table 2 Programs of DEM simulations

滑槽坡度/(°)	粒径特征
20，45	NM1（4 mm）；NM2（8 mm）；NM3（16 mm）
20，45	NB1 (90%)，NB2 (80%)，NB3 (60%)，NB4 (40%)，NB5 (20%)，NB6 (10%)

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 离心试验中冲击前滑坡碎屑流的流态（模型尺度）

Table 3 Flow regimes of debris avalanche before impact in centrifuge modeling tests (model scale)

工况	项目	${u_{\text{f}}}$ /(m·s^-1)	${h_{\text{f}}}$ /mm	${N_{F{\text{r}}}}$	${N_{\text{s}}}$
PM1	测试1	12.55	12.16	7.13	0.03
	测试2	13.12	12.02	7.50	0.03
	测试3	12.80	12.66	7.13	0.02
	平均值	12.82	12.28	7.25	0.03
PM2	测试1	12.51	11.36	7.35	0.20
	测试2	13.42	12.99	7.37	0.16
	测试3	14.28	13.56	7.68	0.16
	平均值	13.40	12.64	7.47	0.17
PM3	测试1	12.73	13.32	6.91	0.52
	测试2	12.07	13.06	6.62	0.50
	测试3	11.94	12.77	6.62	0.52
	平均值	12.24	13.05	6.71	0.52
PM4	测试1	13.85	14.64	7.17	1.87
	测试2	13.25	15.23	6.72	1.52
	测试3	13.43	16.08	6.63	1.33
	测试4	12.92	15.94	6.41	1.26
	平均值	13.36	15.47	6.73	1.47
PB1	测试2	13.43	12.04	7.67	0.03
	测试3	13.93	12.97	7.67	0.03
	平均值	13.68	12.50	7.66	0.03
PB2	测试2	13.35	14.23	7.01	1.89
	测试3	12.99	13.83	6.92	1.95
	平均值	13.17	14.03	6.96	1.92

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 不同粒径特征下滑坡碎屑流冲击压力峰值的离心试验结果

Table 4 Peak values of impact pressure of debris avalanches with different particle characteristics obtained from centrifuge tests 单位: kPa

工况	测试编号	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6
PM1	测试1	182.41	164.82	86.85	56.01	3.03	85.42
	测试2	178.71	136.06	85.03	33.71	5.95	65.00
	测试3	176.22	150.16	84.51	32.19	5.88	60.60
	平均值	179.11	150.35	85.46	40.64	4.96	70.34
	标准偏差	2.55	11.74	1.01	10.89	1.36	10.81
PM2	测试1	210.68	196.95	140.39	72.89	17.18	108.72
	测试2	232.51	187.69	148.07	68.77	20.25	105.82
	测试3	261.75	220.33	139.42	56.86	20.22	105.35
	平均值	234.98	201.66	142.63	66.17	19.22	106.63
	标准偏差	25.62	16.82	4.74	8.33	1.77	1.82
PM3	测试1	255.91	203.04	106.48	79.37	27.71	98.19
	测试2	249.64	180.80	143.98	74.75	25.18	126.92
	测试3	204.24	241.77	189.94	65.03	20.10	92.44
	平均值	236.59	208.54	146.80	73.05	24.33	105.85
	标准偏差	28.20	30.85	41.80	7.32	3.88	18.48
PM4	测试1	407.69	170.97	150.82	67.48	54.09	78.07
	测试2	302.82	168.89	112.81	41.65	28.71	118.84
	测试3	209.72	119.67	154.94	124.91	27.28	108.62
	测试4	215.13	163.51	92.38	108.80	14.93	76.95
	平均值	283.84	155.76	127.74	85.71	31.25	95.62
	标准偏差	92.94	24.27	30.25	38.05	16.43	21.33
PB1	测试1	308.58	204.48	99.83	52.58	13.66	82.36
	测试2	232.76	194.12	117.92	51.26	13.49	90.93
	测试3	262.68	188.72	120.89	59.22	12.63	77.57
	平均值	268.01	195.77	112.88	54.35	13.26	83.62
	标准偏差	38.19	8.01	11.40	4.27	0.55	6.77
PB2	测试1	229.09	262.83	180.65	46.14	16.53	142.13
	测试2	215.84	140.17	179.31	69.56	10.12	154.71
	测试3	234.75	160.28	144.93	53.00	12.43	183.99
	平均值	226.56	187.76	168.30	56.23	13.03	160.27
	标准偏差	9.70	65.78	20.25	12.04	3.25	21.48

下载: 导出CSV

表 5 不同粒径特征下滑坡碎屑流流态及冲击力峰值的离散元模拟结果

Table 5 Peak impact forces and flow regimes of debris avalanches with different particle characteristics obtained from DEM simulations

测试编号	${u_{{\text{f}}\_\max }}$ /(m·s^-1)	${h_{{\text{f}}\_\max }}$ /m	${N_{{\text{Fr}}}}$	${N_{\text{s}}}$	${F_{{\text{n}}\_\max }}$ /N	${F_{{\text{m}}\_\max }}$ /N
NM1_25°	2.661	0.040	6.469	0.187	135.57	30.63
NM1_45°	4.255	0.068	5.862	0.092	519.21	408.07
NM2_25°	2.489	0.043	5.821	0.519	159.83	101.46
NM2_45°	4.150	0.071	5.620	0.317	515.45	474.38
NM3_45°	2.364	0.049	5.186	1.274	248.61	243.31
NM3_25°	4.091	0.080	5.224	0.866	627.51	589.40
NB1_25°	2.360	0.036	6.012	0.779	149.61	104.51
NB1_45°	4.060	0.058	6.094	0.563	547.82	492.77
NB2_25°	2.520	0.040	6.090	0.647	155.41	111.33
NB2_45°	4.090	0.076	5.345	0.249	593.21	560.64
NB3_25°	2.440	0.050	5.274	0.311	168.54	123.92
NB3_45°	4.050	0.080	5.159	0.209	591.19	525.95
NB4_25°	2.340	0.050	5.058	1.143	161.90	127.75
NB4_45°	4.030	0.080	5.133	0.828	580.51	545.18
NB5_25°	2.320	0.050	5.015	1.124	156.31	130.42
NB5_45°	4.080	0.082	5.133	0.788	600.89	573.09
NB6_25°	2.312	0.050	4.998	1.116	159.07	133.42
NB6_45°	4.020	0.081	5.089	0.794	576.32	565.95

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(32)

[1]	HUNGR O, LEROUEIL S, PICARELLI L. The Varnes classification of landslide types, an update[J]. Landslides, 2014, 11(2): 167-194. doi: 10.1007/s10346-013-0436-y
[2]	许强, 李为乐, 董秀军, 等. 四川茂县叠溪镇新磨村滑坡特征与成因机制初步研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2017, 36(11): 2612-2628. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YSLX201711002.htm XU Qiang, LI Weile, DONG Xiujun, et al. The Xinmocun landslide on June 24, 2017 in Maoxian, Sichuan: characteristics and failure mechanism[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2017, 36(11): 2612-2628. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YSLX201711002.htm
[3]	李坤, 程谦恭, 林棋文, 等. 高速远程滑坡颗粒流研究进展[J]. 地球科学, 2022(3): 893-912. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DQKX202203012.htm LI Kun, CHENG Qiangong, LIN Qiwen, et al. State of the art on rock avalanche dynamics from granular flow mechanics[J]. Earth Science, 2022(3): 893-912. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DQKX202203012.htm
[4]	GARIANO S L, GUZZETTI F. Landslides in a changing climate[J]. Earth Science Reviews, 2016, 162: 227-252. doi: 10.1016/j.earscirev.2016.08.011
[5]	THOURET J C, ANTOINE S, MAGILL C, et al. Lahars and debris flows: characteristics and impacts[J]. Earth Science Reviews, 2020, 201: 103003. doi: 10.1016/j.earscirev.2019.103003
[6]	ZHOU G G D, SONG D, CHOI C E, et al. Surge impact behavior of granular flows: effects of water content[J]. Landslides, 2018, 15(4): 695-709. doi: 10.1007/s10346-017-0908-6
[7]	SHEN W G, ZHAO T, ZHAO J D, et al. Quantifying the impact of dry debris flow against a rigid barrier by DEM analyses[J]. Engineering Geology, 2018, 241: 86-96. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2018.05.011
[8]	NG C W W, MAJEED U, CHOI C E. Effects of solid fraction of saturated granular flows on overflow and landing mechanisms of rigid barriers[J]. Géotechnique, 2024, 74(1): 27-41. doi: 10.1680/jgeot.21.00170
[9]	FAUG T, LACHAMP P, NAAIM M. Experimental investigation on steady granular flows interacting with an obstacle down an inclined channel: study of the dead zone upstream from the obstacle. Application to interaction between dense snow avalanches and defence structures[J]. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 2002, 2: 187-191. doi: 10.5194/nhess-2-187-2002
[10]	王友彪, 姚昌荣, 刘赛智, 等. 泥石流对桥墩冲击力的试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(2): 616-623. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YTLX201902023.htm WANG Youbiao, YAO Changrong, LIU Saizhi, et al. Experimental study of debris flow impact forces on bridge piers[J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2019, 40(2): 616-623. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YTLX201902023.htm
[11]	何思明, 李新坡, 吴永. 考虑弹塑性变形的泥石流大块石冲击力计算[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2007, 26(8): 1664-1669. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-6915.2007.08.017 HE Siming, LI Xinpo, WU Yong. Calculation of impact force of outrunner blocks in debris flow considering elastoplastic deformation[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2007, 26(8): 1664-1669. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-6915.2007.08.017
[12]	WANG L P, SONG D R, ZHOU G G D, et al. Debris flow overflowing flexible barrier: physical process and drag load characteristics[J]. Landslides, 2022, 19(8): 1881-1896. doi: 10.1007/s10346-022-01880-0
[13]	ARMANINI A, ROSSI G, LARCHER M. Dynamic impact of a water and sediments surge against a rigid wall[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Research, 2020, 58(2): 314-325. doi: 10.1080/00221686.2019.1579113
[14]	SONG D R, CHEN X Q, ZHOU G G D, et al. Impact dynamics of debris flow against rigid obstacle in laboratory experiments[J]. Engineering Geology, 2021, 291: 106211. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2021.106211
[15]	FAUG T. Impact force of granular flows on walls normal to the bottom: slow versus fast impact dynamics[J]. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2021, 58(1): 114-124. doi: 10.1139/cgj-2019-0399
[16]	ALBABA A, LAMBERT S, FAUG T. Dry granular avalanche impact force on a rigid wall: analytic shock solution versus discrete element simulations[J]. Physical Review E, 2018, 97(): 052903. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.97.052903
[17]	王东坡, 张小梅. 泥石流冲击弧形拦挡坝动力响应研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(12): 3851-3861. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YTLX202012004.htm WANG Dongpo, ZHANG Xiaomei. Study on dynamic response of debris flow impact arc-shaped dam[J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2020, 41(12): 3851-3861. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YTLX202012004.htm
[18]	BI Y Z, DU Y J, HE S M, et al. Numerical analysis of effect of baffle configuration on impact force exerted from rock avalanches[J]. Landslides, 2018, 15(5): 1029-1043. doi: 10.1007/s10346-018-0979-z
[19]	GOODWIN G R, CHOI C E, YUNE C Y. Towards rational use of baffle arrays on sloped and horizontal terrain for filtering boulders[J]. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2021, 58(10): 1571-1589. doi: 10.1139/cgj-2020-0363
[20]	WANG D P, LI Q Z, BI Y Z, et al. Effects of new baffles system under the impact of rock avalanches[J]. Engineering Geology, 2020, 264: 105261. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2019.105261
[21]	JIANG Y J, ZHAO Y, TOWHATA I, et al. Influence of particle characteristics on impact event of dry granular flow[J]. Powder Technology, 2015, 270: 53-67. doi: 10.1016/j.powtec.2014.10.005
[22]	JIANG Y J, FAN X Y, LI T H, et al. Influence of particle-size segregation on the impact of dry granular flow[J]. Powder Technology, 2018, 340: 39-51. doi: 10.1016/j.powtec.2018.09.014
[23]	CUI Y F, CHOI C E, LIU L H D, et al. Effects of particle size of mono-disperse granular flows impacting a rigid barrier[J]. Natural Hazards, 2018, 91(3): 1179-1201. doi: 10.1007/s11069-018-3185-3
[24]	ZHANG B, HUANG Y. Effect of unsteady flow dynamics on the impact of monodisperse and bidisperse granular flow[J]. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 2022, 81(2): 77. doi: 10.1007/s10064-022-02573-7
[25]	宋东日, 周公旦, CHOI C E, 等. 土工离心机模拟泥石流问题的相似性考虑[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2019, 41(12): 2262-2271. doi: 10.11779/CJGE201912011 SONG Dongri, ZHOU Gongdan, CHOI C E, et al. Scaling principles of debris flow modeling using geotechnical centrifuge[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2019, 41(12): 2262-2271. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11779/CJGE201912011
[26]	SONG D, CHOI C E, ZHOU G G D, et al. Impulse load characteristics of bouldery debris flow impact[J]. Géotechnique Letters, 2018, 8(2): 111-117. doi: 10.1680/jgele.17.00159
[27]	ZHANG B, HUANG Y. Impact behavior of superspeed granular flow: insights from centrifuge modeling and DEM simulation[J]. Engineering Geology, 2022, 299: 106569. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2022.106569
[28]	DEM solutions, EDEM 2020.1 document[Z]. Edinburgh: Altair, 2020: 1-100 [April 9, 2023]. https://www.altair.com.cn/edem/.
[29]	GOODWIN S R, CHOI C E. Translational inertial effects and scaling considerations for coarse granular flows impacting landslide-resisting barriers[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2021, 147(12): 04021153. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002661
[30]	LAM H W K, WONG A L. Experimental and numerical study of dynamic soil debris impact load on reinforced concrete debris-resisting barriers[J]. Landslides, 2021, 18(3): 955-966. doi: 10.1007/s10346-020-01529-w
[31]	KWAN J. Supplementary technical guidance on design of rigid debris-resisting barriers [R]. Hong Kong: Geotechnical Engineering Office, 2012: 1-88. https://www.cedd.gov.hk/eng/publications/geo_reports/geo_rpt270.html.
[32]	LI K, WANG Y F, LIN Q W, et al. Experiments on granular flow behavior and deposit characteristics: implications for rock avalanche kinematics[J]. Landslides, 2021, 18(5): 1779-1799. doi: 10.1007/s10346-020-01607-z