考虑河床坡度和泄流槽横断面影响的堰塞坝溃决过程试验研究

石振明; 张公鼎; 彭铭; 马晨议

doi:10.16030/j.cnki.issn.1000-3665.202202024

考虑河床坡度和泄流槽横断面影响的堰塞坝溃决过程试验研究

1.
同济大学土木工程学院地下建筑与工程系, 上海　200092

2.
同济大学岩土及地下工程教育部重点实验室, 上海　200092

基金项目: 国家自然科学基金项目（41731283; 42071010; 41877234）

详细信息

作者简介: 石振明（1968-），男，教授，博士，研究方向为地质灾害与岩土工程。E-mail：shi_tongji@tongji.edu.cn

通讯作者: 彭铭（1981-），男，副教授，博士，研究方向为地质灾害风险防控。E-mail：pengming@tongji.edu.cn

中图分类号: P642.22

收稿日期: 2022-02-16

修回日期: 2022-03-29

刊出日期: 2022-09-15

An experimental study of the breaching process of landslide dams with different bed slopes and drainage channel cross-sections

1.
Department of Geotechnical Engineering, College of Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai　200092, China

2.
Key Laboratory of Geotechnical and Underground Engineering of Ministry of Education, Tongji University, Shanghai　200092, China

More Information

Corresponding author: PENG Ming, pengming@tongji.edu.cn

Received Date: 16 February 2022

Revised Date: 29 March 2022

Publish Date: 15 September 2022

摘要

摘要:
针对缺乏地形条件和工程处置措施对堰塞坝溃决过程影响研究的现状，采用4种河床坡度（0°、1°、2°、3°）和3种泄流槽横断面型式（三角形、梯形、复合型），开展了堰塞坝溃决的模型试验。通过分析堰塞坝的溃决流量、溃决历时、溃口发展和坝体纵截面演变过程，研究了不同河床坡度和泄流槽横断面对堰塞坝溃决过程的影响规律。试验结果表明：（1）堰塞坝溃决过程可分为3个阶段。阶段I：溃口形成阶段，溃决流量较小；阶段II：溃口发展阶段，水流下蚀及侧蚀强烈，溃决流量到达峰值；阶段III：衰减-平衡阶段，粗化层形成，溃口停止发展。（2）河床坡度增加意味着下游坝坡、坝顶及泄流槽的坡度增加，导致水流侵蚀能力增强，溃口下切迅猛，因此在0°~3°范围内河床坡度越大，峰值流量越大，峰现时间越早，溃决流量过程曲线越趋于“高瘦型”，且残留坝高越小。（3）泄流槽横断面型式不同导致其槽深、槽宽和侧坡坡度不同，进而影响溃口发展和溃决流量。三角形槽的水土作用面积小，溃口下切及展宽速率最高，峰值流量最大，峰现时间最早；梯形槽的槽底高程最高，水土作用面积最大，溃口下切速率最低，峰现时间最晚；而复合槽介于前两者之间。试验成果将为堰塞坝应急抢险和工程措施的选取提供依据。
- 堰塞坝 /
- 溃决过程 /
- 峰值流量 /
- 河床坡度 /
- 泄流槽横断面
Abstract:
The breaching process of landslide dams influenced by bed slopes and drainage channels are still unclear. In this study, flume tests of landslide dams including four different bed slope angles (0°, 1°, 2° and 3°) and three different drainage channel cross sections (triangle, trapezoid and compound) are carried out. The effects of bed slopes and drainage channel cross sections on the outflow discharge, breaching duration, breach development and longitudinal evolution process of landslide dams are investigated. The results show that (1) the breaching process is divided into three stages. Stage I is the breach initiation stage with a slow breach erosion. Stage II is the breach development stage with a severe breach erosion. Stage III is the attenuating and re-equilibrium stage with the formation of an armored layer and the breach erosion gradually stops. (2) With the increasing bed slope angle, the dam crest and downstream slope angle increases, which enhances the shear stress acting on the soil and the deep-cutting erosion. Thus, when the bed slope is steeper, the peak discharge is larger, the arrival time of peak is shortened and the residual dam height is smaller. (3) Drainage channels with different cross sections have different depths, widths and lateral slopes, which influence the breach development and the outflow discharge. For the triangle drainage channel, its water-soil interface area is small, both the breach deepening and widening rates are the largest, while the peak discharge is the largest and the arrival time of peak is the earliest. For the trapezoidal drainage channel, its bottom elevation is the highest and water-soil interface area is the largest, while the breach deepening rate is the lowest and the arrival time of peak is the latest. The compound drainage channel is between the two former channels. The experimental results may provide important references for emergency treatment of landslide dams.
- landslide dam /
- breaching process /
- peak discharge /
- riverbed slope /
- cross-section of drainage channel

HTML全文

图 1 试验装置示意图

Figure 1.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 坝体材料

Figure 2.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 模型坝体和量测装置

Figure 3.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 泄流槽横断面型式(单位：cm)

Figure 4.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 工况2的坝体溃决过程

Figure 5.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 工况2的溃决流量过程曲线

Figure 6.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 工况1—工况6的坝体纵截面演变示意图

Figure 7.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 工况1—工况4的溃决流量过程曲线

Figure 8.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 工况2、工况5、工况6的溃决流量过程曲线

Figure 9.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 试验工况参数表

Table 1. Summary of the test conditions

工况	河床坡度/（°）	泄流槽横断面型式	入流量/（L·s⁻¹）
1	0	三角形	1.0
2	1	三角形	1.0
3	2	三角形	1.0
4	3	三角形	1.0
5	1	梯形	1.0
6	1	复合型	1.0

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 工况1—工况6的坝体溃决参数

Table 2. Breaching parameters of tests 1−6

工况	阶段I 历时/s	阶段II 历时/s	阶段III 历时/s	溃决历时/s	峰值流量 /（L·s⁻¹）	峰现时间/s
1	206	62	57	325	2.61	240
2	123	82	75	280	3.01	155
3	102	105	56	263	3.67	135
4	76	137	33	246	4.14	110
5	158	89	65	312	2.63	195
6	139	103	50	292	2.41	175

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 工况2、工况5、工况6的溃口下切及展宽平均速率

Table 3. Breach deepening and widening rates in tests 2, 5 and 6

工况	溃口下切速率/（mm·s⁻¹）	溃口展宽速率/（mm·s⁻¹）
2	0.643	0.679
5	0.561	0.545
6	0.599	0.479

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(30)

[1]	CASAGLI N,ERMINI L,ROSATI G. Determining grain size distribution of the material composing landslide dams in the Northern Apennines:Sampling and processing methods[J]. Engineering Geology,2003,69(1/2):83 − 97. doi: 10.1016/S0013-7952(02)00249-1
[2]	PENG M, JIANG Q L, ZHANG Q Z, et al. Stability analysis of landslide dams under surge action based on large-scale flume experiments[J]. Engineering Geology, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2019.105191.
[3]	LI M H,SUNG R T,DONG J J,et al. The formation and breaching of a short-lived landslide dam at Hsiaolin Village,Taiwan—Part II:Simulation of debris flow with landslide dam breach[J]. Engineering Geology,2011,123(1/2):60 − 71.
[4]	PENG M,ZHANG L M. Breaching parameters of landslide dams[J]. Landslides,2012,9(1):13 − 31. doi: 10.1007/s10346-011-0271-y
[5]	吴瑞安,马海善,张俊才,等. 金沙江上游沃达滑坡发育特征与堵江危险性分析[J]. 水文地质工程地质,2021,48(5):120 − 128. [WU Ruian,MA Haishan,ZHANG Juncai,et al. Developmental characteristics and damming river risk of the Woda landslide in the upper reaches of the Jinshajiang River[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology,2021,48(5):120 − 128. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[6]	杨琴,范宣梅,许强,等. 北川唐家湾滑坡变形历史与形成机制研究[J]. 水文地质工程地质,2018,45(2):136 − 141. [YANG Qin,FAN Xuanmei,XU Qiang,et al. A study of the deformation history and mechanism of the Tangjiawan landslide[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology,2018,45(2):136 − 141. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[7]	王兰生,杨立铮,李天斌,等. 四川岷江叠溪较场地震滑坡及环境保护[J]. 地质灾害与环境保护,2000,11(3):195 − 199. [WANG Lansheng,YANG Lizheng,LI Tianbin,et al. Evolution mechanism of Jiaochang earthquake landslide on Ming River and its controlling[J]. Journal of Geological Hazards and Environment Preservation,2000,11(3):195 − 199. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-4362.2000.03.001
[8]	CHAI H J,LIU H C,ZHANG Z Y,et al. The distribution,causes and effects of damming landslides in China[J]. Journal of Chengdu University of Technology,2000,27(3):302 − 307.
[9]	ZHU P Y,LI T. Flash flooding caused by landslide dam failure[J]. ICIMOD Newsletter,2011(38):4 − 5.
[10]	SHANG Y J,YANG Z F,LI L H,et al. A super-large landslide in Tibet in 2000:background,occurrence,disaster,and origin[J]. Geomorphology,2003,54(3/4):225 − 243.
[11]	王光谦,傅旭东,李铁建,等. 汶川地震灾区堰塞湖应急处置中的计算分析[J]. 中国水土保持科学,2008,6(5):1 − 6. [WANG Guangqian,FU Xudong,LI Tiejian,et al. Analysis for emergency treatment of quake lakes in Wenchuan earthquake-hit regions[J]. Science of Soil and Water Conservation,2008,6(5):1 − 6. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-3007.2008.05.001
[12]	GREGORETTI C,MALTAURO A,LANZONI S. Laboratory experiments on the failure of coarse homogeneous sediment natural dams on a sloping bed[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,2010,136(11):868 − 879. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000259
[13]	CHEN S C,LIN T W,CHEN C Y. Modeling of natural dam failure modes and downstream riverbed morphological changes with different dam materials in a flume test[J]. Engineering Geology,2015,188:148 − 158. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2015.01.016
[14]	蒋先刚,崔鹏,王兆印,等. 堰塞坝溃口下切过程试验研究[J]. 四川大学学报(工程科学版),2016,48(4):38 − 44. [JIANG Xiangang,CUI Peng,WANG Zhaoyin,et al. Experiments investigation on longitudinal breaching of natural dam[J]. Journal of Sichuan University (Engineering Science Edition),2016,48(4):38 − 44. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[15]	陈晓清, 崔鹏, 游勇, 等. 一种人工调控排泄流量的堰塞湖处置方法及其应用: CN101718085B[P]. 2011-02-02 CHEN Xiaoqing, CUI Peng, GAO Quan, et al. Disposal method of barrier lake for artificially regulating and controlling drain flow and application: CN101718085B[P]. 2011-02-02. （in Chinese）
[16]	曹永涛,高航,夏修杰. 堰塞湖坝体处理及溃决模拟试验研究[J]. 人民黄河,2010,32(12):205 − 206. [CAO Yongtao,GAO Hang,XIA Xiujie. Experimental study on treatment and dam break simulation of landslide dam[J]. Yellow River,2010,32(12):205 − 206. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1379.2010.12.087
[17]	赵天龙,陈生水,付长静,等. 堰塞坝泄流槽断面型式离心模型试验研究[J]. 岩土工程学报,2017,39(10):1943 − 1948. [ZHAO Tianlong,CHEN Shengshui,FU Changjing,et al. Centrifugal model tests on section form of drainage channel of barrier dams[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,2017,39(10):1943 − 1948. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.11779/CJGE201710025
[18]	COLEMAN S E,ANDREWS D P,WEBBY M G. Overtopping breaching of noncohesive homogeneous embankments[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,2002,128(9):829 − 838. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2002)128:9(829)
[19]	MORRIS M W,HASSAN M A A M,VASKINN K A. Breach formation:Field test and laboratory experiments[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Research,2007,45(Sup 1):9 − 17. doi: 10.1080/00221686.2007.9521828
[20]	DAVIES T R,MANVILLE V,KUNZ M,et al. Modeling landslide dambreak flood magnitudes:Case study[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,2007,133(7):713 − 720. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2007)133:7(713)
[21]	XU F G, YANG X G, ZHOU J W, et al. Experimental research on the dam-break mechanisms of the jiadanwan landslide dam triggered by the Wenchuan earthquake in China[J]. The Scientific World Journal, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/272363.
[22]	张婧,曹叔尤,杨奉广,等. 堰塞坝泄流冲刷试验研究[J]. 四川大学学报(工程科学版),2010,42(5):191 − 196. [ZHANG Jing,CAO Shuyou,YANG Fengguang,et al. Experimental study on outlet and scour of blocked dam[J]. Journal of Sichuan University (Engineering Science Edition),2010,42(5):191 − 196. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[23]	赵高文,王萌,杨宗佶,等. 震后泥石流沟内滑坡堰塞坝的侵蚀特征分析:以银洞子堰塞坝为例[J]. 工程科学与技术,2019,51(5):68 − 77. [ZHAO Gaowen,WANG Meng,YANG Zongji,et al. Eroding characteristics of landslide dams in debris flow gullies after earthquakes—Case study of Yindongzi landslide dam[J]. Advanced Engineering Sciences,2019,51(5):68 − 77. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[24]	王道正,陈晓清,罗志刚,等. 不同颗粒级配条件下堰塞坝溃决特征试验研究[J]. 防灾减灾工程学报,2016,36(5):827 − 833. [WANG Daozheng,CHEN Xiaoqing,LUO Zhigang,et al. Experimental research on breaking of barrier lake dam under different grading conditions[J]. Journal of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Engineering,2016,36(5):827 − 833. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[25]	徐富刚,杨兴国,周家文. 堰塞坝漫顶破坏溃口演变机制试验研究[J]. 重庆交通大学学报(自然科学版),2015,34(6):79 − 83. [XU Fugang,YANG Xingguo,ZHOU Jiawen. Experimental study on dyke evolution mechanism in dam-break process of landslide dam[J]. Journal of Chongqing Jiaotong University (Natural Science),2015,34(6):79 − 83. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[26]	XU Q,FAN X M,HUANG R Q,et al. Landslide dams triggered by the Wenchuan Earthquake,Sichuan Province,south West China[J]. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment,2009,68(3):373 − 386. doi: 10.1007/s10064-009-0214-1
[27]	CHANG D S,ZHANG L M. Simulation of the erosion process of landslide dams due to overtopping considering variations in soil erodibility along depth[J]. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences,2010,10(4):933 − 946. doi: 10.5194/nhess-10-933-2010
[28]	郭万里,朱俊高,温彦锋. 对粗粒料4种级配缩尺方法的统一解释[J]. 岩土工程学报,2016,38(8):1473 − 1480. [GUO Wanli,ZHU Jungao,WEN Yanfeng. Unified description for four grading scale methods for coarse aggregate[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,2016,38(8):1473 − 1480. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.11779/CJGE201608015
[29]	ZHOU G G D,ZHOU M J,SHRESTHA M S,et al. Experimental investigation on the longitudinal evolution of landslide dam breaching and outburst floods[J]. Geomorphology,2019,334:29 − 43. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2019.02.035
[30]	GRAF W H. Hydraulics of sediment transport[M]. New York: McGraw Hill, 1971.