DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on Numerical Analysis for Debris Flow considering the Application of Debris Flow Mitigation Facilities

토석류 저감시설 적용에 따른 토석류 수치해석에 관한 연구

  • Bae Dong Kang (Graduate School of Disaster Prevention, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Jung Soo An (Graduate School of Disaster Prevention, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Kye Won Jun (Graduate School of Disaster Prevention, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Chang Deok Jang (CND Co.)
  • 강배동 (강원대학교 방재전문대학원) ;
  • 안중수 (강원대학교 방재전문대학원) ;
  • 전계원 (강원대학교 방재전문대학원) ;
  • 장창덕 ((주)씨앤디)
  • Received : 2023.12.13
  • Accepted : 2023.12.28
  • Published : 2023.12.31

Abstract

The impact of prolonged rainfall, such as during the monsoon season or intense concentrated rainfall over a short period, can lead to mountainous disasters such as landslides and debris flows. These events, such as landslides and debris flows, cause both human and material damage, prompting the implementation of various measures and research to prevent them. In the context of researching debris flow disasters, numerical models for debris flows provide a relatively simple way to analyze the risk in a study area. However, since empirical equations are applied in these models, yielding different results and variations in input variables across models, the validation of numerical models becomes essential. In this study, a numerical model for debris flows was employed to compare and analyze the mitigation effects of facilities such as check dams and water channel work, aiming to reduce the damage caused by debris flows.

장마와 같이 장기간에 내리는 강우나 단기간에 많은 양의 강우가 내리는 집중호우의 영향으로 산사태, 토석류와 같은 산지재해가 발생한다. 산사태와 토석류는 인적, 물적 피해를 야기하므로 이를 예방하기 위한 다양한 대책의 적용과 연구가 수행되고 있다. 토석류 재해 연구 중 토석류 수치모형은 비교적 간단하게 연구지역에 대한 위험도를 분석할 수 있다. 다만 경험에 의한 방정식이 적용되어 모형마다 다른 결과를 나타내고 입력변수도 모델마다 차이가 있어 수치모형의 검증은 필수적이다. 본 연구에서는 토석류 수치모형을 이용하여 토석류의 피해를 저감하기 위한 시설인 사방댐과 종단구조물인 계간수로를 반영하여 이에 따른 저감효과를 비교·분석하였다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by the program of Research Program to Solve Urgent Safety Issues (2022M3E9A1095664), through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF), funded by the Korean government (Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT), Ministry of the Interior and Safety (MOIS)).

References

  1. Ikeya, H. (1981). A Method of Designation for Area in Danger of Debris Flow. Erosion and Sediment Transport in Pacific Rim Steeplands-Proceedings of the Christchurch Symposium. International Association of Hydrological Sciences Publication No. 132. 576-588.
  2. Kim, Nam Gyun. (2011). A Study on Transport and Diffusion of Debris Flow with FLO-2D. M.S. Dissertation. Kangwon National University. 1-58.
  3. Kim, Young Hwan. (2017). Sediment Discharge Analysis according to Location Change of Check Dam Using Debris Flow Numerical Model. M.S. Dissertation. Kangwon National University. 1-62.
  4. Lim, Young Hyup. (2017). A Study on the Application of Numerical Simulation to Erosion Control Facility Using KANA KO 2D. Ph.D. Dissertation. Kangwon National University. 1-85.
  5. Nakatani, K., E. Iwanami, S. Horiuchi, Y. Satofuka, and T. Mizuyama. (2012). Development of "Hyper KANAKO", a Debris Flow Simulation System Based on Laser Profiler Data. Proceedings of the 12th Congress INTERPRAEVENT. 269-280.
  6. Nakatani, K., T. Wada, Y. Satofuka, and T. Mizuyama. (2008). Development of "Kanako 2D (Ver.2.00)," a User-Friendly One- and Two-Dimensional Debris Flow Simulator Equipped with a Graphical User Interface. International Journal of Erosion Control Engineering. 1(2): 62-72.
  7. National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management. (2016). Manual of Technical Standard for Establishing Sabo Master Plan for Debris Flow and Driftwood. Technical Note of National Institute for Land Infrastructure Management. No. 364. Tsukuba: NILIM.
  8. Takahashi, T. (2001). Process of Occurrence, Flow and Deposition of Viscous Debris Flow. River, Coastal and Estuarine Morphodynamics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. 93-118.
  9. Takahashi, T. (2007). Progress in Debris Flow Modeling. Progress in Landslide Science. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. 59-77.