2019
DOI: 10.1007/s10064-019-01557-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Investigation and dynamic analysis of the catastrophic rockslide avalanche at Xinmo, Maoxian, after the Wenchuan Ms 8.0 earthquake

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
9
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
1
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The maximum run-out distance, L s (measured from the rear edge of the source area to the distal edge of the deposits, seen in Figure 10F) in the numerical simulation is 2,450 m, which is close to the field investigation that was reported in , 2,418 m. However, the maximum width, L w , along the river, 1,400 m, is slightly larger than the field measurement value, 1,200 m . Figure 11a shows the simulated deposit thickness; the maximum simulated deposit thickness is 55 m, which is larger than the actual thickness, 31 m. The average deposit thickness, 10.8 m, is close to the average value, 10 m, derived from field investigation (Wang et al, 2020). In this study, a uniform contact friction angle, 22 • , between the sliding body and the sliding bed assumed is much smaller than the slope of the scraping area, which results in no blocks piling up in the entrained area and a higher deposit thickness than in reality in the area above the scrape.…”
Section: Evolutions Of Sliding Mass Positionsupporting
confidence: 59%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The maximum run-out distance, L s (measured from the rear edge of the source area to the distal edge of the deposits, seen in Figure 10F) in the numerical simulation is 2,450 m, which is close to the field investigation that was reported in , 2,418 m. However, the maximum width, L w , along the river, 1,400 m, is slightly larger than the field measurement value, 1,200 m . Figure 11a shows the simulated deposit thickness; the maximum simulated deposit thickness is 55 m, which is larger than the actual thickness, 31 m. The average deposit thickness, 10.8 m, is close to the average value, 10 m, derived from field investigation (Wang et al, 2020). In this study, a uniform contact friction angle, 22 • , between the sliding body and the sliding bed assumed is much smaller than the slope of the scraping area, which results in no blocks piling up in the entrained area and a higher deposit thickness than in reality in the area above the scrape.…”
Section: Evolutions Of Sliding Mass Positionsupporting
confidence: 59%
“…The LS-RAPID landslide dynamics computer software based on the liquefied model proposed by Sassa et al (2010) has successfully analyzed the long run-out landslides with characteristics of substrate liquefaction and mass amplification induced by earthquakes or rainfall. Wang et al (2020) conducted the simulation of the Xinmo Landslide using different dynamic models and their results suggested that the liquefied model is not suitable for the Xinmo rock avalanche because there is no liquefaction condition according to the field investigation. In our study, pore pressure is not taken into account and a constant friction angle is used considering the low water content of the colluvium in the path, even if there was a long time of rainfall before the slope failure (Li et al, 2012).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Through repeated material ratio tests, it is determined that the ratio of the simulated rock material is gypsum:clay:river sand:water = 1:5.38:1.52:0.27, and the ratio of the weak structure plane simulated material is clay:river sand:water = 1:6.89:0.25. Through density tests, direct shear tests, and triaxial compression tests, the density of the rock material is 1.908 g/cm 3 , the cohesion is 15.5 kPa, the internal friction angle is 37.9 • , the density of the structural surface material is 1.72 g/cm 3 . The cohesion force is 2.7 kPa and the internal friction angle is 41.7 • .…”
Section: Design and Manufacture Of Slope Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Frequent seismic activity and a fragile geological environment are factors that easily induce large-scale landslides. The Wenchuan Ms 8.0 earthquake, Lushan Ms 7.0 earthquake, and Ludian Ms 6.5 earthquake have all caused a large number of slope collapses [1][2][3][4]. The bedding rock slope is a very common type of slope distributed in the Sichuan-Tibet railway construction area [5,6].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When high-intensity earthquakes occur, strong ground vibrations may induce large-scale landslides [3,4]. For example [5][6][7], the Wenchuan Ms 8.0 earthquake triggered about 60,000 landslides, which caused the injuries and deaths of more than 20,000 people. Five years later, the magnitude 7.0 earthquake in Lushan also triggered more than 3,800 landslides.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%