Risk assessment of landslide-induced river blockage based on RAMMS

doi:10.13745/j.esf.sf.2024.12.2

Abstract

Abstract:

Landslides blocking rivers are widespread in the world’s mountainous areas, often triggering secondary disasters such as mudslides, barrier lakes and outburst floods, and are an important part of the chain of mountainous geological disasters. China as the world’s territorial power, vast terrain, but the proportion of mountainous area, especially in the southwest of China, by plate extrusion collision, crustal uplift, tectonic activity fracture is common. At the same time the development of the region’s water system, the Nu River, Lancang River, Jinsha River from the Tibetan Plateau was three rivers flowing southward through Yunnan Province, the tectonic movement of the strong erosion and river undercutting effect led to the rock and soil along the banks of the river valley fragmentation is serious, for the occurrence of landslides blocking the river geologic hazards to provide a favorable geological condition. Given the frequent occurrence and severity of landslides blocking rivers, this article takes the Yawuban landslide in Lancang River Basin as an example. Through field geological surveys, unmanned aerial vehicle surveys, GeoStudio simulation software, and RAMMS numerical simulation software, the basic profile of the landslide was identified, the causal mechanism and stability of the landslide were analyzed, the dynamic evolution process of the landslide was simulated and calculated, and finally the danger of landslide blocking rivers was evaluated. The results show that the Yawuban landslide was a large landslide with a total volume of about 7.6×10⁶ m³, and the stability coefficient was 1.042 under the extreme rainstorm condition, the landslide was in an unstable state, and there was a risk of destabilizing and sliding and blocking the river. The RAMMS numerical simulation results show that the total movement time of the Yawuban landslide was 100 s, the maximum movement speed was 42.6 m/s, and the maximum movement height was 68.34 m. After the landslide became unstable, it completely blocked the Lancang River. The maximum speed of entering the river was 25 m/s, forming a dam with a maximum accumulation height of 47 m and a maximum longitudinal length of 1200 m. The results of this study can provide a reference basis for the prediction of landslide river blocking hazard in Lancang River Basin.

Key words: landslide blocking river, UAV aerial survey, GeoStudio, RAMMS, landslide dam, risk assessment

CLC Number:

P642

DI Yong, WEI Yunjie, TAN Weijia, XU Qiang. Risk assessment of landslide-induced river blockage based on RAMMS[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2025, 32(5): 546-556.

Figures/Tables 21

Fig.1 Geographical location of the landslide area

Fig.2 Rainfall map of the landslide area in 2021

Fig.3 Seismic intensity map of the landslide area

Fig.4 Orthophoto of the landslide on the pressure plate

Fig.5 Slope toe at the front edge of landslide

Fig.6 Characteristics of the rock and soil mass in the landslide

Fig.7 Farmland above the landslide

Table 1 Parameters of the Frehmd-Xing Model

参数	a	n	m	M_v	Sat.wc
数值	46 kPa	2.2	2	1×10^-5	0.36

Table 2 Calculation parameters of landslide

参数	天然重度/(kN·m^-3)	饱和重度/(kN·m^-3)	黏聚力/kPa	内摩擦角/(°)	渗透系数/(mm·s^-1)
滑体	21	23	12	22	2×10^-6
基岩	25	—	800	50	1×10^-8

Fig.8 GeoStudio software computation model

Fig.9 Stability coefficient under heavy rain conditions of 40 mm/d

Fig.10 Stability coefficient under the extreme rainstorm condition of 120 mm/d

Fig.11 Comparison map before and after filtering the point cloud

Fig.12 Establishment of RAMMS Numerical Model

Table 3 RAMMS software calculation parameters

参数	DEM分辨率/m	释放区深度/m	释放区体积/m³	摩擦系数μ	湍流系数 ξ/s²	滑坡体密度/ (kg·m^-3)	模拟结束时间/s	动量百分比/%	转储步时间/s
数值	5	12	7 638 200	0.12	250	2 000	1 000	10	5

Fig.13 Movement height-time diagram of the landslide accumulation body on the pressure plate

Fig.14 Velocity-time diagram of the landslide accumulation body on the pressure plate

Fig.15 Proportion of accumulation bodies in different areas of the landslide on the pressure plate

Fig.16 Cross-section of the accumulation body in the river

Fig.17 Profile of the accumulation body in the river

Fig.18 Velocity-time map of landslide into the river

References 33

[1]	韩旭东. 晚更新世曲龙滑坡堵江事件分析及堵江运动特征数值模拟研究[D]. 长春: 吉林大学, 2018.
[2]	李永超. 金沙江上游苏洼龙河段早期滑坡堵江事件识别及演化研究[D]. 长春: 吉林大学, 2021.
[3]	刘传正, 吕杰堂, 童立强, 等. 雅鲁藏布江色东普沟崩滑-碎屑流堵江灾害初步研究[J]. 中国地质, 2019, 46(2): 219-234.
[4]	许强, 郑光, 李为乐, 等. 2018年10月和11月金沙江白格两次滑坡-堰塞堵江事件分析研究[J]. 工程地质学报, 2018, 26(6): 1534-1551.
[5]	邓建辉, 高云建, 余志球, 等. 堰塞金沙江上游的白格滑坡形成机制与过程分析[J]. 工程科学与技术, 2019, 51(1): 9-16.
[6]	胡卸文, 黄润秋, 施裕兵, 等. 唐家山滑坡堵江机制及堰塞坝溃坝模式分析[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2009, 28(1): 181-189.
[7]	王家柱, 任光明, 葛华. 金沙江上游某特大型滑坡发育特征及堵江机制[J]. 长江科学院院报, 2019, 36(2): 46-51, 57.
[8]	高云建, 赵思远, 邓建辉. 青藏高原三江并流区重大堵江滑坡孕育规律及其防灾挑战[J]. 工程科学与技术, 2020, 52(5): 50-61.
[9]	PENG M, ZHANG L M. Breaching parameters of landslide dams[J]. Landslides, 2012, 9(1): 13-31.
[10]	FAN X M, DUFRESNE A, SIVA SUBRAMANIAN S, et al. The formation and impact of landslide dams-State of the art[J]. Earth-Science Reviews, 2020, 203: 103116.
[11]	周礼, 范宣梅, 许强, 等. 金沙江白格滑坡运动过程特征数值模拟与危险性预测研究[J]. 工程地质学报, 2019, 27(6): 1395-1404.
[12]	徐文杰, 陈祖煜, 何秉顺, 等. 肖家桥滑坡堵江机制及灾害链效应研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2010, 29(5): 933-942.
[13]	樊晓一, 黄润秋, 乔建平, 等. 未受河流阻止的滑坡水平运动距离与滑坡堵江判别[J]. 水文地质工程地质, 2014, 41(1): 128-133.
[14]	王珊珊, 童立强, 郭兆成, 等. 基于河长: 坡降指数的滑坡堵江事件自动识别[J]. 工程地质学报, 2017, 25(2): 511-519.
[15]	陈语, 李天斌, 魏永幸, 等. 沟谷型滑坡灾害链成灾机制及堵江危险性判别方法[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2016, 35(增刊2): 4073-4081.
[16]	VAN WESTEN C J, CASTELLANOS E, KURIAKOSE S L. Spatial data for landslide susceptibility, hazard, and vulnerability assessment: an overview[J]. Engineering Geology, 2008, 102(3/4): 112-131.
[17]	刘文, 王猛, 朱赛楠, 等. 基于光学遥感技术的高山极高山区高位地质灾害链式特征分析: 以金沙江上游典型堵江滑坡为例[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报, 2021, 32(5): 29-39.
[18]	陆会燕, 李为乐, 许强, 等. 光学遥感与InSAR结合的金沙江白格滑坡上下游滑坡隐患早期识别[J]. 武汉大学学报(信息科学版), 2019, 44(9): 1342-1354.
[19]	蔡耀军, 徐复兴, 朱萌, 等. 金沙江白格滑坡残留体失稳堵江风险分析[J]. 工程科学与技术, 2021, 53(6): 33-42.
[20]	李高, 谭建民, 王世梅, 等. 滑坡对降雨响应的多指标监测及综合预警探析: 以赣南罗坳滑坡为例[J]. 地学前缘, 2021, 28(6): 283-294.
[21]	殷志强, 魏刚, 秦小光, 等. 青藏高原东北缘黄河上游滑坡与堰塞湖研究进展[J]. 地学前缘, 2021, 28(2): 46-57.
[22]	魏云杰, 王俊豪, 胡爱国, 等. 澜沧江拉金神谷滑坡成灾机理分析[J]. 中国地质调查, 2022, 9(4): 19-26.
[23]	郭方琴. 降雨与水位升降对边坡稳定性影响分析[D]. 南昌: 南昌大学, 2018.
[24]	马茜. 降雨和水位变化对库岸边坡稳定性影响的数值模拟研究[D]. 南京: 南京大学, 2015.
[25]	温丽旺. 云南省云龙县果郎沟泥石流危险性评价研究[D]. 成都: 成都理工大学, 2018.
[26]	鹿守山. 尾矿库漫顶溃坝模型试验及数值模拟[D]. 南昌: 南昌工程学院, 2019.
[27]	费建波, 介玉新, 张丙印, 等. 颗粒流底部摩擦模型在高速远程滑坡模拟中的运用[J]. 水力发电学报, 2016, 35(1): 104-109.
[28]	SALM B. Flow, flow transition and runout distances of flowing avalanches[J]. Annals of Glaciology, 1993, 18: 221-226.
[29]	HUNGR O. A model for the runout analysis of rapid flow slides, debris flows, and avalanches[J]. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 1995, 32(4): 610-623.
[30]	HUNGR O, MCDOUGALL S. Two numerical models for landslide dynamic analysis[J]. Computers and Geosciences, 2009, 35(5): 978-992.
[31]	DI Y, WEI Y J, TAN W J, et al. Research on development characteristics and landslide dam hazard prediction of Zhuangfang landslide in the upper reaches of the Nu river[J]. Sustainability, 2023, 15(20): 15036.
[32]	张宏蓉, 杜娟, 殷坤龙, 等. 基于DAN-3D模型的滑坡运动特性模拟研究[J]. 甘肃科学学报, 2021, 33(6): 103-108.
[33]	郑鸿超, 石振明, 彭铭, 等. 崩滑碎屑体堵江成坝研究综述与展望[J]. 工程科学与技术, 2020, 52(2): 19-28.