Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

9oct 2 franz-land-slide triggered

485 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

9oct 2 franz-land-slide triggered

  1. 1. Vajont 1963-2013 International Conference Dams, landslides and their natural environment Landslide-Triggered Tsunami Modelling in Alpine Lakes M. Franz, Y. Podladchikov, M. Jaboyedoff, M.-H. Derron Université de Lausanne CRET - ISTE dimanche 10 novembre 2013
  2. 2. Outline • Introduction • Methodology – – – – Toro tests Additional tests Resolution test in 2D Synthesis • Case study – – – – Context Slide characteristics Wave modelling Comparison • Conclusion - Perspectives 2 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  3. 3. INTRODUCTION 3 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  4. 4. Environmental context Alpine region o Population o Lake o Slope Necessity to assess this Risk Predictive model (Google earth, NASA, 2012) 4 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  5. 5. Modelling context • Generally applicable equations from model tests (Slingerland & Voight, 1979; Wieczorek et al., 2003; Heller et al., 2009) Useful for a first approach Qualitative approach of the bathymetry • Shallow water equations (SWE) (Wieczorek, 2007; Gonzalez-Vida et al., 2011; Pudasaini & Miller, 2012) Comprehensive method (bathymetry) Numerical artefacts (on real bathymetry) Problems with wet to dry bed transition • 3D (Lynett & Liu, 2004; Zijlema & Stelling, 2008; Ward & Day, 2011) Most accurate method Great computational power required (supercomputing) We choose the models based on SWE 5 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  6. 6. METHODOLOGY 6 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  7. 7. The numerical schemes 7 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  8. 8. Tests • 5 tests from Toro (2001) – Build for dam break problems • 3 additional tests – For wave generated by landslide – For application to real bathymetry • 2D resolution test 8 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  9. 9. Toro tests 5 tests from Toro (2001) – Left critical Rarefaction and Right Shock – Two rarefaction and nearly dry bed – Right dry bed Riemann problem – Left dry bed Riemann problem – Generation of a dry bed 9 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  10. 10. Toro tests 5 tests from Toro (2001) – Left critical Rarefaction and Right Shock – Two rarefaction and nearly dry bed – Right dry bed Riemann problem – Left dry bed Riemann problem – Generation of a dry bed 10 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  11. 11. Toro tests 5 tests from Toro (2001) – Left critical Rarefaction and Right Shock – Two rarefaction and nearly dry bed – Right dry bed Riemann problem – Left dry bed Riemann problem – Generation of a dry bed 11 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  12. 12. Toro tests 5 tests from Toro (2001) – Left critical Rarefaction and Right Shock – Two rarefaction and nearly dry bed – Right dry bed Riemann problem – Left dry bed Riemann problem – Generation of a dry bed 12 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  13. 13. Toro tests 5 tests from Toro (2001) – Left critical Rarefaction and Right Shock (ZOOM) – Two rarefaction and nearly dry bed – Right dry bed Riemann problem – Left dry bed Riemann problem – Generation of a dry bed 13 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  14. 14. Toro tests 5 tests from Toro (2001) – Left critical Rarefaction and Right Shock (ZOOM) – Two rarefaction and nearly dry bed – Right dry bed Riemann problem – Left dry bed Riemann problem – Generation of a dry bed 14 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  15. 15. Toro tests 5 tests from Toro (2001) – Left critical Rarefaction and Right Shock (ZOOM) – Two rarefaction and nearly dry bed – Right dry bed Riemann problem – Left dry bed Riemann problem – Generation of a dry bed LF & Gup non oscillatory Selected for further tests 15 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  16. 16. Additional tests 3 additional tests for Landslide – generated Tsunami – Moderate test of landslide penetration – Extreme test of landslide penetration – Rough bed 16 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  17. 17. Additional tests 3 additional tests for Landslide – generated Tsunami – Moderate test of landslide penetration – Extreme test of landslide penetration – Rough bed 17 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  18. 18. Additional tests 3 additional tests for Landslide – generated Tsunami – Moderate test of landslide penetration – Extreme test of landslide penetration – Rough bed 18 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  19. 19. Resolution test in 2D • LF scheme • Circular dam break Experiment 2D Wave prop. 2D Wave prop. CPU time [s] 200 2500 GPU time [s] 4 500 Ratio GPU-CPU 50 50 Resolution 1280x 1280 6400 x 6400 19 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  20. 20. Synthesis • All the schemes successfully passed the tests • LF and GUP are the best solutions because they are not oscillatory • The diffusive problem of LF decrease with the increase of the resolution • The run time rise with the resolution but is compensated by the use of GPU computing 20 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  21. 21. CASE STUDY (CONFIDENTIAL SITE) 21 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  22. 22. Context (Swisstopo) (Swisstopo) (SIG, 2012) 22 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  23. 23. Slide characteristics • Geometry : – – – – – Length: 100 m Width: 250 m Max. depth: 15 m Volume: 200’000 m3 Velocity: 5 m/s (CSD, 2012) 23 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  24. 24. Wave modelling • 1D modelling with LF – Dam – Dike • 2D modelling with LF • Comparison of the wave height between different methods 24 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  25. 25. Wave modelling • 1D – Dam 25 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  26. 26. Wave modelling • 1D – Dyke 26 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  27. 27. Wave modelling 27 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  28. 28. Wave modelling (Swisstopo) • 2d (Swisstopo) 28 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  29. 29. Comparison • Equations from model test – H3 (ICOLD, 2000) – Hmax (Kamphuis & Bowering, 1970) – wh3d, wr3d (Heller et al., 2009) 29 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  30. 30. CONCLUSION PERSPECTIVES 30 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  31. 31. Conclusion • Model – LF scheme can be the method of choice because: • • • • Non-oscillatory Diffusivity disappear with high resolution Withstands rough beds Simple • Case study – No (major) numerical artefacts or instabilities detected – Handle real topography - Validated with other methods But - Do not manage the wet-dry transition yet 31 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  32. 32. Perspectives • Calibration on well known cases • Coupling LF with Gup to handle wet-dry transition • Two-phases model development for a fully comprehensive system – – – – – Landslide propagation modelling Interaction between landslide and water Propagation of the impulse wave through the water body Erosion of the landslide dam (in case of overtopping) Erosion of the river banks (in case of downstream flood or outburst) 32 dimanche 10 novembre 201
  33. 33. Thank you for your attention Grazie 33 dimanche 10 novembre 201

×