Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published byLinda Millard Modified over 4 years ago

1
PROGRAMME Interreg IVa – Alcotra 2007-2013 PROGRAMME Interreg IVa – Alcotra 2007-2013 M. A. S. S. A. Discrete Modeling of Rock Avalanches FEDER Fonds Européens pour le Développement Régional Ensemble au-delà des frontières Insieme oltre i confini Guilhem Mollon, Vincent Richefeu, Pascal Villard, Dominique Daudon 3SR Lab, University of Grenoble, France

2
Context of the study Frank slide, 30 10 3 m 3 Pirulli and Mangeney, 2007 10 3 m 3 - 10 5 m 3 Purpose : numerical modeling of the propagation of a rock avalanche

3
Experiences performed at EPFL Base of the study: experimental device from EPFL Materials: Object of the study: propagation and deposit of the granular mass Manzella and Labiouse 2009

4
Principles of the modeling Discrete Element Modeling with Coulomb friction coefficient and normal damping Bricks modeled by sphero- polyedra

5
Experimental identification of the parameters 4 parameters to determine for each type of contact : Experimental device of controlled fall Filmed by 2 cameras, 1000 frames/seconde Tracking of 3 points on each frame, and 4 points in total Back-analysis of the 3D trajectory to obtain the model parameters

6
Results of the fitting : V x V y V z ω x ω y ω z Before and after impact Determination of the kinematics of the brick from the trajectories of the points : back-analyse 1 Experimental identification of the parameters

7
Experimental measurements V x V y V z ω x ω y ω z Measured before impact V x V y V z ω x ω y ω z Measured after impact Introduction in the discrete model Numerical simulation for a given set of the parameters (e n 2, μ, k n, k t ) V x V y V z ω x ω y ω z Computed after impact Comparison Erreur function : err(e n 2, μ, k n, k t ) Minimization Determination of the contact parameters from the kinematics of the brick: back-analyse 2 Experimental identification of the parameters

8
Result of the fitting Example of result for a Brick- Support impact Optimal parameters: en2en2 μknkn k t /k n Brick/Support contact 0,530,46 (φ=25°)10 5 0,42 Brick/Brick contact 0,130,86 (φ=41°)10 5 0,27

9
Simulation of 6300 randomly poured bricks Simulation of the EPFL experiment (Manzella and Labiouse 2009) with bricks randomly poured in the starting box Parameters of the simulation: Release height: 1m Apparent volume: 40L Number of particle: 6307 Material density: 17kN/m3 “Smooth” support

10
Results of the simulation: Simulation of 6300 randomly poured bricks

11
Comparison of the experimental and numerical deposits: First information about the deposit kinematics Simulation of 6300 randomly poured bricks

12
Kinematics of the rock flow Initial apparent volume : 40L Final apparent volume : 57L Volume change along time :

13
Kinematics of the rock flow Close study of the velocities, angular velocities, and solid fraction during the flow -Velocity is maximum before the transition zone, constant in the deposit -Important angular velocities at the angle, no more rotation in the deposit -Solid fraction decreases in the slope, and slightly increases in the deposit

14
Energy considerations The numerical results provide the evolution of the energy levels in the flow: -The kinetic energy is maximal just after the impact on the horizontal plane -The kinetic energy related to rotations is negligible -Most of the energy dissipation is related to basal friction Along time: Along the X-axis: -There is a peak of energy dissipation around the transition zone -This peak is related to inter- particle energy dissipations

15
Influence of the basal friction Introduction of a « macro-roughness » at the blocks scale: Question: How does it compare with a simple increase of the friction coefficient on a regular slope ?

16
Influence of the basal friction Case B: Introduction of a « macro-roughness » Case A: Increase of the friction coefficient of the slope Volume Change Deposit Shape Energy Balance

17
Perspectives - Work in progress Modeling of a rock avalanche in a real context Use of a digital Elevation Model Short-term application: Rock avalanche on the Néron (Grenoble, France) in 2011

18
Conclusion Cutting Procedure

19
Conclusion Thank you Guilhem Mollon

Similar presentations

OK

Problem 8. Pebble skipping. Problem It is possible to throw a flat pebble in such a way that it can bounce across a water surface. What conditions must.

Problem 8. Pebble skipping. Problem It is possible to throw a flat pebble in such a way that it can bounce across a water surface. What conditions must.

© 2018 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

To make this website work, we log user data and share it with processors. To use this website, you must agree to our Privacy Policy, including cookie policy.

Ads by Google