2016
DOI: 10.1007/s10346-016-0679-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The August 27, 2014, rock avalanche and related impulse water waves in Fuquan, Guizhou, China

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
10
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
1
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Contour lines of normalized residuals are provided in Fig. 4, indicating that the inversion converged to the actual landslide location (Xing et al 2016;Lin et al 2018) with an error of ~ 3.0 km. The best-fitting landslide location allows us to confirm that the seismic energy recorded by seismic stations was indeed generated by the landslide.…”
Section: Landslide Force Historymentioning
confidence: 83%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Contour lines of normalized residuals are provided in Fig. 4, indicating that the inversion converged to the actual landslide location (Xing et al 2016;Lin et al 2018) with an error of ~ 3.0 km. The best-fitting landslide location allows us to confirm that the seismic energy recorded by seismic stations was indeed generated by the landslide.…”
Section: Landslide Force Historymentioning
confidence: 83%
“…A catastrophic landslide occurred at about 8:30 p.m. (Beijing Time, UTC + 8, used throughout this paper) on August 27, 2014, in Fuquan, Guizhou, China. After the movement on the slope, the sliding mass plunged into the water-filled quarry in front, inducing impulse water waves that destroyed two villages, damaged 77 houses, killed 23 persons and injured 22 others (Xing et al 2016;Lin et al 2018). As shown in Fig.…”
Section: The Xiaoba Landslidementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Less focus has been directed toward accurately modeling the physics of landslide initiation and motion and the evolving landslide-water interaction. Most modeling efforts that do seek to resolve these earlier stages of the landslide wave-generation process can be broadly categorized as follows: (1) approaches that utilize an independent landslide model that is used to generate boundary conditions for a wave-propagation model [e.g., Adabie et al, 2012;Xing et al, 2016;Grilli et al, 2009], (2) variable-density 3-D multifluid models [e.g., Abadie et al, 2010;Horrillo et al, 2013], and (3) depth-averaged multilayered models in which the landslide material is assumed to completely underlie the water body [e.g., Fernández-Nieto et al, 2010;Ma et al, 2015;Kirby et al, 2016].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Accordingly, numerical models which consider the rheological behavior of the sliding mass in their calculations have been recently applied more often. The most applied continuous rheological models so far include the Coulomb model, Herschel-Bulkley model, Bagnold model, and Bingham model (Shakeri Majd and Sanders, 2014;Cremonesi et al, 2011;Yavari-Ramshe and Ataie-Ashtiani, 2016;Xing et al, 2016). Those that describe avalanche, landslide, or debris flow motions in discontinuous medium models are mainly the FEM-discrete element method model (FEM-DEM; Morris et al, 2006;Munjiza, 2004;Li et al, 2015) and DEM model (Smilauer et al, 2010;Brennen, 2005;Utili et al, 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%