Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-qzcqf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-28T20:46:59.840Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 14 - Modeling lahar behavior and hazards

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 March 2013

By
Vernon Manville ,
Jon J. Major  and
Sarah A. Fagents
Edited by
Sarah A. Fagents ,
Tracy K. P. Gregg  and
Rosaly M. C. Lopes
Sarah A. Fagents
Affiliation:
University of Hawaii, Manoa
Tracy K. P. Gregg
Affiliation:
State University of New York, Buffalo
Rosaly M. C. Lopes
Affiliation:
NASA-Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California
Get access

Summary

Overview

Lahars are highly mobile mixtures of water and sediment of volcanic origin that are capable of traveling tens to > 100 km at speeds exceeding tens of km hr−1. Such flows are among the most serious ground-based hazards at many volcanoes because of their sudden onset, rapid advance rates, long runout distances, high energy, ability to transport large volumes of material, and tendency to flow along existing river channels where populations and infrastructure are commonly concentrated. They can grow in volume and peak discharge through erosion and incorporation of external sediment and/or water, inundate broad areas, and leave deposits many meters thick. Furthermore, lahars can recur for many years to decades after an initial volcanic eruption, as fresh pyroclastic material is eroded and redeposited during rainfall events, resulting in a spatially and temporally evolving hazard. Improving understanding of the behavior of these complex, gravitationally driven, multi-phase flows is key to mitigating the threat to communities at lahar-prone volcanoes. However, their complexity and evolving nature pose significant challenges to developing the models of flow behavior required for delineating their hazards and hazard zones.

Introduction

The Indonesian word “lahar”’ refers to a highly mobile mixture of water and sediment, other than normal stream flow, originating from a volcano (e.g., Fig. 14.1; Smith and Fritz, 1989). The term has genetic connotations rather than implying any particular flow behavior, which can range from dilute hyperconcentrated flows, in which particle concentrations greater than those of normal streamflow conditions are transported chiefly as suspended and bedload sediment, to debris flows in which a high-concentration particulate phase transports sediment en masse with fluid in its interstices (Vallance, 2000). Lahars vary greatly in volume (~102–109 m3), peak discharge (< 10–107 m3 s−1), advance rate (~2–80 m s−1) and runout (a few to > 100 km; Pierson, 1998).

Type
Chapter
Information
Modeling Volcanic Processes
The Physics and Mathematics of Volcanism
 , pp. 300 - 330
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ancey, C. (2007). Plasticity and geophysical flows. Journal of Non-Newtonian Fluid Mechanics, 142, 4–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Apmann, R. P. (1973). Estimating discharge from superelevation in bends. Journal of the Hydraulics Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, 99(HY1), 65–79.Google Scholar
Arattano, M. and Savage, W. Z. (1994). Modelling debris flows as kinematic waves. Bulletin of the International Association of Engineering Geologists, 49, 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arattano, M., Franzi, L. and Marchi, L. (2006). Influence of rheology on debris-flow simulation. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 6, 519–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arcement, G. J. J. and Schneider, V. R. (1989). Guide for Selecting Manning’s Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels And Flood Plains. United States Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper, 2339.
Armanini, A., Capart, H., Fraccarollo, L. and Larcher, M. (2005). Rheological stratification in experimental free-surface flows of granular-fluid mixtures. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 532, 269–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bagnold, R. A. (1954). Experiments on a gravity-free dispersion of large solid spheres in a Newtonian fluid under shear. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A, 225, 49–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baum, R. L., Savage, W. Z. and Godt, J. W. (2002). TRIGRS – a Fortran program for transient rainfall infiltration and grid-based regional slope-stability analysis. U.S. Geological Survey Open-file Report 02–0424.
Berger, C., McArdell, B. W. and Schlunegger, F. (2011). Direct measurement of channel erosion by debris flows, Ilgraben, Switzerland. Journal of Geophysical Research, 116, F01002, doi:.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, M. J., George, D. L., LeVeque, R. J. and Mandli, K. T. (2011). The GEOCLAW software for depth-averaged flows with adaptive refinement. Advances in Water Resources, 34, 1195–1206, doi:.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berzi, D., Jenkins, J. T. and Larcher, M. (2010). Debris flows: Recent advances in experiments and modeling. Advances in Geophysics, 52, 103–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beverage, J. P. and Culbertson, J. K. (1964). Hyperconcentrations of suspended sediment. Journal of the Hydraulics Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, 90(HY6), 117–128.Google Scholar
Björnsson, H. (1992). Jökulhlaups in Iceland: prediction, characteristics and simulation. Annals of Glaciology, 16, 95–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bulmer, M. H., Barnouin-Jha, O., Peitersen, M. N. and Bourke, M. (2002). An empirical approach to studying debris flows: Implications for planetary modeling studies. Journal of Geophysical Research, 107(B5), 9.1–9.16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canuti, P., Casagli, N., Catani, F. and Falorni, G. (2002). Modeling of the Guagua Pichincha volcano (Ecuador) lahars. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 27, 1587–1599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Capra, L., Macías, J. L., Scott, K. M., Abrams, M. and Garduño-Monroy, V. H. (2002). Debris avalanches and debris flows transformed from collapses in the Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt, Mexico – behaviour, and implications for hazard assessment. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 113, 81–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrivick, J. L., Manville, V. and Cronin, S. J. (2009). A fluid dynamics approach to modeling the 18th March 2007 lahar at Mt. Ruapehu, New Zealand. Bulletin of Volcanology, 71, 153–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrivick, J. L., Manville, V., Graettinger, A. H. and Cronin, S. J. (2010). Coupled fluid dynamics-sediment transport modelling of a Crater Lake break-out lahar: Mt. Ruapehu, New Zealand. Journal of Hydrology, 388, 399–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, C. L. (1987). Comprehensive review of debris flow modelling concepts in Japan. In Debris Flows and Avalanches: Process, Recognition, and Mitigation, ed. Costa, J. E. and Wieczorek, G. F.. Geological Society of America, pp. 13–29.Google Scholar
Chen, C. L. (1988a). Generalized visco-plastic modelling of debris flow. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 114, 237–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, C. L. (1988b). General solutions for viscoplastic debris flow. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 114, 259–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christen, M., Kowalski, J. and Bartelt, P. (2010). RAMMS: Numerical simulation of dense snow avalanches in three-dimensional terrain. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 63, 1–14, doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, S. E., Cronin, S. J., Sherburn, S. and Manville, V. (2009). Seismic signals of snow-slurry lahars in motion: 25 September 2007, Mt. Ruapehu, New Zealand. Geophysical Research Letters, 36, L09405, doi:.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Contreras, S. M. and Davies, T. R. H. (2000). Coarse-grained debris-flows: Hysteresis and time-dependent rheology. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 126, 938–941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, J. E. (1984). Physical geomorphology of debris flows. In Development and Applications in Geomorphology, ed. Costa, J. E. and Fleischer, P. J.. Berlin: Springer, pp. 263–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, J. E. (1988). Rheologic, geomorphic, and sedimentologic differentiation of water floods, hyperconcentrated flows and debris flows. In Flood Geomorphology, ed. Baker, V. R., Kochel, R. C. and Patton, P. C.. New York: John Wiley and Sons, pp. 113–122.Google Scholar
Costa, J. E. (1997). Hydraulic modeling for lahar hazards at Cascades volcanoes. Environmental and Engineering Geoscience, 3, 21–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coussot, P. and Meunier, M. (1996). Recognition, classification and mechanical description of debris flows. Earth Science Reviews, 40, 209–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coussot, P., Laigle, D., Arattano, M., Deganutti, A. and Marchi, L. (1998). Direct determination of rheological characteristics of debris flow. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 124, 865–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, S. J., Neall, V. E., Lecointre, J. A. and Palmer, A. S. (1997). Changes in Whangaehu River lahar characteristics during the 1995 eruption sequence, Ruapehu volcano, New Zealand. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 76, 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, S. J., Neall, V. E., Lecointre, J. A. and Palmer, A. S. (1999). Dynamic interactions between lahars and stream flow: A case study from Ruapehu volcano, New Zealand. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 111, 28–38.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, S. J., Lecointre, J. A., Palmer, A. S. and Neall, V. E. (2000). Transformation, internal stratification, and depositional processes within a channelised, multi-peaked lahar flow. New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics, 43, 117–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cui, P., Chen, X., Wang, Y., Hu, K. and Li, Y. (2005). Jiangjia Ravine debris flows in southwestern China. In Debris-Flow Hazards and Related Phenomena, ed. Jakob, M. and Hungr, O.. Chichester, UK: Springer-Praxis, pp. 565–594.Google Scholar
Dalbey, K., Patra, A. K., Pitman, E. B., Bursik, M. I. and Sheridan, M. F. (2008). Input uncertainty propagation methods and hazard mapping of geophysical mass flows. Journal of Geophysical Research, 113, B05203, doi:.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denlinger, R. P. and Iverson, R. M. (2001). Flow of variably fluidized granular masses across three-dimensional terrain 2: Numerical predictions and experimental tests. Journal of Geophysical Research, 106, 553–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunne, T. and Fairchild, L. H. (1983). Estimation of flood and sedimentation hazards around Mt. St. Helens. Shin Sabo, Journal of the Japan Society of Erosion Control Engineering, 36, 12–22.Google Scholar
Dunne, T. and Leopold, L. B. (1981). Flood and sedimentation hazards in the Toutle and Cowlitz River system as a result of the Mt. St. Helens eruption. Federal Emergency Management Agency Report, Region X.
Fagents, S. A. and Baloga, S. M. (2006). Toward a model for the bulking and debulking of lahars. Journal of Geophysical Research, 111, B10201, doi:.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairchild, L. H. (1986). Quantitative analysis of lahar hazard. In Mount St. Helens: 5 years later, ed. Keller, S. A. C.. Washington D.C.: Washington University Press, pp. 61–67.Google Scholar
Fink, J. H., Malin, M. C., D’alli, R. E. and Greeley, R. (1981). Rheological properties of mudflows associated with the spring 1980 eruptions of Mount St. Helens volcano, Washington. Geophysical Research Letters, 8, 43–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forterre, Y. and Pouliquen, O. (2008). Flows of dense granular media. Annual Reviews of Fluid Mechanics, 40, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fread, D. L. (1996). Dam-breach floods. In Hydrology of Disasters, ed. Singh, V. P.. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 85–126.Google Scholar
George, D. L. (2010). Adaptive finite volume methods with well-balanced Riemann solvers for modeling floods in rugged terrain – application to the Malpasset dam-break flood (France, 1959). International Journal of Numerical Methods in Fluids, 66, 1000–1018, doi:.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, D. L. and Iverson, R. M. (2011). A two-phase debris-flow model that includes coupled evolution of volume fractions, granular dilatancy, and pore-fluid pressure. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Debris Flow Hazards Mitigation, 14–17 June, 2011, Padova, Italy, ed. R. Genevois, D. L. Hamilton and A. Prestininzi, Italian Journal of Engineering Geology and Environment, 415–424, doi:.
Glaze, L. S., Baloga, S. M. and Barnouin-Jha, O. S. (2002). Rheologic inferences from high-water marks of debris flows. Geophysical Research Letters, 29(8), doi: .CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griswold, J. P. and Iverson, R. M. (2008). Mobility Statistics and Automated Hazard Mapping for Debris Flows and Rock Avalanches. United States Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5276.
Hampton, M. A. (1975). Competence of fine-grained debris flows. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 45, 834–844.Google Scholar
Hancox, G. T., Keys, H. and Webby, M. G. (2001). Assessment and mitigation of dam-break lahar hazards from Mt. Ruapehu Crater Lake following the 1995–96 eruptions. In Engineering and Development in Hazardous Terrains, ed. Mcmanus, K. J.. Christchurch: New Zealand Institute of Professional Engineers.Google Scholar
Hubbard, B. E., Sheridan, M. F., Carrasco-Núñez, G., Díaz-Castellón, R. and Rodriguez, S. R. (2007). Comparative lahar hazard mapping at Volcan Citlaltépetl, Mexico using SRTM, ASTER and DTED-1 digital topographic data. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 160, 99–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huggel, C., Schneider, D., Julio Miranda, P., Delgado, H. and Kääb, A. (2008). Evaluation of ASTER and SRTM DEM for lahar modeling: A case study on lahars from Popocatépetl Volcano, Mexico. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 170, 99–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hungr, O. (1990). Mobility of rock avalanches. Report of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, Japan, 46, 11–20.Google Scholar
Hunt, M. L., Zenit, R., Campbell, C. S. and Brennen, C. E. (2002). Revisiting the 1954 suspension experiments of R. A. Bagnold. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 452, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hürlimann, M., Rickenmann, D., Medina, V. and Bateman, A. (2008). Evaluation of approaches to calculate debris-flow parameters for hazard assessment. Engineering Geology, 102, 152–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutter, K., Svendsen, B. and Rickenmann, D. (1996). Debris flow modeling: A review. Continuum Mechanics and Thermodynamics, 8, 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iverson, R. M. (1997a). The physics of debris flows. Reviews of Geophysics, 35, 245–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iverson, R. M. (1997b). Hydraulic modelling of unsteady debris-flow surges with solid-fluid interactions. In Debris-Flow Hazards Mitigation: Mechanics, Prediction, and Assessment, ed. Chen, C.-L.. San Francisco: American Society of Civil Engineers, pp. 550–560Google Scholar
Iverson, R. M. (2003). The debris-flow rheology myth. In Debris-Flow Hazards Mitigation: Mechanics, Prediction, and Assessment, ed. Rickenmann, D. and Chen, C.-L.. Rotterdam: Millpress, pp. 303–314.Google Scholar
Iverson, R. M. (2009). Elements of an improved model of debris-flow motion. In Powders and Grains 2009, ed. M. Nakagawa and S. Luding. Melville, Ny: American Institute of Physics, pp. 9–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iverson, R. M. and Denlinger, R. P. (1987). The physics of debris flows – a conceptual assessment. In Erosion and Sedimentation in the Pacific Rim, ed. Beschta, R. L., Blinn, T., Grant, G. E., Ice, G. G., and Swanson, F. J.. International Association of Hydrological Sciences Publication 165, pp. 155–165.Google Scholar
Iverson, R. M. and Denlinger, R. P. (2001). Flow of variably fluidized granular masses across three-dimensional terrain 1: Coulomb mixture theory. Journal of Geophysical Research, 106(B1), 537–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iverson, R. M. and Vallance, J. W. (2001). New views of granular mass flows. Geology, 29, 115–118.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iverson, R. M., Schilling, S. P. and Vallance, J. W. (1998). Objective delineation of lahar-inundation hazard zones. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 110, 972–984.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iverson, R. M., Logan, M. and Denlinger, R. P. (2004). Granular avalanches across irregular three-dimensional terrain: 2. Experimental tests. Journal of Geophysical Research, 109, F01015, doi:.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iverson, R. M., Logan, M., Lahusen, R. G. and Berti, M. (2010). The perfect debris flow? Aggregated results from 28 large-scale experiments. Journal of Geophysical Research, 115, F03005, doi:.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iverson, R. M., Reid, M. E., Logan, M. et al. (2011). Positive feedback and momentum growth during debris-flow entrainment of wet bed sediment. Nature Geoscience, 4, 116–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, A. M. (1970). Physical Processes in Geology. San Francisco: Freeman Cooper and Company.
Johnson, A. M. and Rodine, J. R. (1984). Debris flow. In Slope Instability, ed. Brunsden, D. and Prior, D. B.. Wiley, pp. 257–361.Google Scholar
Kang, Z. and Zhang, S. (1980). A preliminary analysis of the characteristics of debris flow. In Proceedings of the International Symposium of River Sedimentation. Beijing: Chinese Society for Hydraulic Engineering, pp. 225–226.Google Scholar
Kaitna, R., Rickenmann, D. and Schatzmann, M. (2007). Experimental study on rheologic behaviour of debris flow material. Acta Geotechnica, 2, 71–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilgour, G., Manville, V., Della Pasqua, F. et al. (2010). The 25 September 2007 eruption of Mt. Ruapehu, New Zealand: Directed ballistics, Surtseyan jets, and ice-slurry lahars. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 191, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumagai, H., Palacios, P., Maeda, T., Barba Castillo, D. and Nakano, M. (2009). Seismic tracking of lahars using tremor signals. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 183, 112–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laenen, A. and Hansen, R. P. (1988). Simulation of Three Lahars in the Mount St. Helens Area, Washington, Using a One-Dimensional, Unsteady-State Streamflow Model. United States Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigation Report, 88–4004.
Lambe, T. W. and Whitman, R. V. (1969). Soil Mechanics. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Lavigne, F. and Suwa, H. (2004). Contrasts between debris flows, hyperconcentrated flows and stream flows at a channel of Mount Semeru, East Java, Indonesia. Geomorphology, 61, 41–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavigne, F., Thouret, J.-C., Voight, B., Suwa, H. and Sumaryono, A. (2000a). Lahars at Merapi volcano: an overview. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 100, 423–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavigne, F., Thouret, J.-C., Voight, B. et al. (2000b). Instrumental lahar monitoring at Merapi Volcano, Central Java, Indonesia. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 100, 457–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macedonio, G. and Pareschi, M. T. (1992). Numerical simulation of some lahars from Mount St. Helens. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 54, 65–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Major, J. J. (1997). Depositional processes in large-scale debris-flow experiments. Journal of Geology, 105, 345–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Major, J. J. (2000). Gravity-driven consolidation of granular slurries – Implications for debris-flow deposition and deposit characteristics. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 70, 64–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Major, J. J. and Iverson, R. M. (1999). Debris-flow deposition: effects of pore-fluid pressure and friction concentrated at flow margins. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 111, 1424–1434.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Major, J. J. and Newhall, C. G. (1989). Snow and ice perturbation during historical volcanic eruptions and the formation of lahars and floods – a global review. Bulletin of Volcanology, 52, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Major, J. J. and Pierson, T. C. (1992). Debris flow rheology: experimental analysis of fine-grained slurries. Water Resources Research, 28, 841–857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Major, J. J., Schilling, S. P. and Pullinger, C. R. (2003). Volcanic debris flows in developing countries: The extreme need for public education and awareness of debris-flow hazards. In Debris-flow Hazards Mitigation: Mechanics, Prediction, and Assessment, ed. Rickenmann, D. and Chen, C. -L.. Rotterdam: Millpress, pp. 1185–1196.Google Scholar
Major, J. J., Schilling, S. P., Pullinger, C. R. and Escobar, C. D. (2004). Debris-flow hazards at San Salvador, San Vicente, and San Miguel Volcanoes, El Salvador. In Natural Hazards in El Salvador, ed. Rose, W. I., Bommer, J. J., Lopez, D. L., Carr, M. J. and Major, J. J.. Geological Society of America Special Paper 375, pp. 89–108.CrossRef
Major, J. J., Pierson, T. C. and Scott, K. M. (2005). Debris flows at Mount St. Helens, Washington, USA. In Debris-flow Hazards and Related Phenomena, ed. Jakob, M. and Hungr, O.. Chichester, UK: Springer-Praxis, pp. 685–731.Google Scholar
Manville, V. (2004). Palaeohydraulic analysis of the 1953 Tangiwai lahar: New Zealand’s worst volcanic disaster. Acta Vulcanologica, XVI(1/2), 137–152.Google Scholar
Manville, V. and Cronin, S. J. (2007). Break-out lahar from New Zealand’s Crater Lake. Eos, Transactions of the American Geophysical Union, 88, 441–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manville, V., Hodgson, K. A. and White, J. D. L. (1998). Rheological properties of a remobilised-tephra lahar associated with the 1995 eruption of Ruapehu Volcano, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics, 41, 157–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marchi, L., Arattano, M. and Deganutti, A. M. (2002). Ten years of debris-flow monitoring in the Moscardo Torrent (Italian Alps). Geomorphology, 46, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McArdell, B. W., Bartelt, P. and Kowalski, J. (2007). Field observations of basal forces and fluid pore pressure in a debris flow. Geophysical Research Letters, 34, L07406, doi:.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCoy, S. W., Kean, J. W., Coe, J. A. et al. (2010). Evolution of a natural debris flow: In situ measurements of flow dynamics, video imagery, and terrestrial laser scanning. Geology, 38, 735–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Middleton, G. V. and Wilcock, P. R. (1994). Mechanics in the Earth and Environmental Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Muñoz-Salinas, E., Castillo-Rodriguez, M., Manea, V. C., Manea, M. and Palacios, D. (2009). Lahar flow simulations using LAHARZ program: Application for the Popocatépetl volcano, Mexico. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 182, 13–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neall, V. E. (1996). Hydrological disasters associated with volcanoes. In Hydrology of Disasters, ed. Singh, V. P.. Kluwer, pp. 395–425.Google Scholar
O’Brien, J. S. (2007). FLO-2D User’s Manual, Version 2007.06 ().
O’Brien, J. S. and Julien, P. Y. (1988). Laboratory analysis of mudflow properties. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 114, 877–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, J. S., Julien, P. Y. and Fullerton, W. T. (1993). Two-dimensional water flood and mudflow simulation. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 119, 246–261.Google Scholar
Ohsumi Works Office (1995). Debris Flow at Sakurajima, Japan. Kyushu Regional Construction Bureau.Google Scholar
Patra, A. K., Bauer, A. C., Nichita, C. C. et al. (2005). Parallel adaptive numerical simulation of dry avalanches over natural terrain. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 139, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, C. J. and Davies, T. R. H. (1991). Determining rheological parameters of debris flow material. Geomorphology, 4, 101–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierson, T. C. (1986). Flow behavior of channelized debris flows, Mount St. Helens, Washington. In Hillslope Processes, ed. Abrahams, A. D.. Boston: Allen & Unwin, pp. 269–296.Google Scholar
Pierson, T. C. (1995). Flow characteristics of large eruption-triggered debris flows at snow-clad volcanoes: constraints for debris-flow models. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 66, 283–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierson, T. C. (1997). Transformation of water flood to debris flow following the eruption-triggered transient-lake breakout from the crater on 19 March 1982. In Hydrologic Consequences of Hot-Rock/Snowpack Interactions at Mount St. Helens Volcano, Washington, 1982–84, ed. Pierson, T. C.. United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 1586, pp. 19–36.
Pierson, T. C. (1998). An empirical method for estimating travel times for wet volcanic mass flows. Bulletin of Volcanology, 60, 98–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierson, T. C. (2005). Hyperconcentrated flow – transitional process between water flow and debris flow. In Debris-flow Hazards and Related Phenomena, ed. Jakob, M. and Hungr, O.. Chichester, UK: Springer-Praxis, pp. 159–202.Google Scholar
Pierson, T. C. and Costa, J. E. (1987). A rheologic classification of subaerial sediment-water flows. In Debris Flows/Avalanches: Process, Recognition, and Mitigation, ed. Costa, J. E. and Wieczorek, G. F.. Geological Society of America, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
Pierson, T. C. and Scott, K. M. (1985). Downstream dilution of a lahar: transition from debris to hyperconcentrated streamflow. Water Resources Research, 21, 1511–1524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierson, T. C., Janda, R. J., Thouret, J.-C. and Borrero, C. A. (1990). Perturbation and melting of snow and ice by the 13 November 1985 eruption of Nevado del Ruiz, Columbia, and consequent mobilization, flow and deposition of lahars. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 41, 17–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pitman, E. B. and Le, L. (2005). A two-fluid model for avalanche and debris flows. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 363, 1573–1601.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pitman, E. B., Nichita, C. C., Patra, A. et al. (2003). Computing granular avalanches and landslides. Physics of Fluids, 15, 3638–3646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Procter, J. N., Cronin, S. J., Fuller, I. C. et al. (2010). Lahar hazard assessment using TITAN2D for an alluvial fan with rapidly changing geomorphology: Whangaehu River, Mt. Ruapehu. Geomorphology, 116, 162–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rickenmann, D. (1999). Empirical relationships for debris flows. Natural Hazards, 19, 47–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodolfo, K. S. and Arguden, A. T. (1991). Rain-lahar generation and sediment-delivery systems at Mayon Volcano, Philippines. In Sedimentation in Volcanic Settings, ed. R. V. Fisher and G. A. Smith. Society for Sedimentary Geology Special Publication, 45, 71–87.Google Scholar
de Saint-Venant, A. J. C. B. (1871). Theory of the nonpermanent movement of waters with the application to the floods of rivers and to the introduction of the tides within their beds. Comptes Rendus de l’Academie des Sciences, 73, 147–154, 237–240.Google Scholar
Savage, S. B. (1984). The mechanics of rapid granular flows. Advances in Applied Mechanics, 24, 289–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage, S. B. and Hutter, K. (1989). The motion of a finite mass of granular material down a rough incline. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 199, 177–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage, S. B. and Hutter, K. (1991). The dynamics of avalanches of granular materials from initiation to runout. Part I: Analysis. Acta Mechanica, 86, 201–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage, S. B. and Iverson, R. M. (2003). Surge dynamics coupled to pore-pressure evolution in debris flows. In Debris-flow Hazards Mitigation: Mechanics, Prediction, and Assessment, ed. Rickenmann, D. and Chen, C.-L.. Rotterdam: Millpress, pp. 503–514.Google Scholar
Schilling, S. P. (1998). LAHARZ: GIS Programs for Automated Mapping of Lahar-Inundation Hazard Zones. United States Geological Survey Open-File Report 98–638.
Scott, K. M. (1988). Origins, behavior, and sedimentology of lahars and lahar-runout flows in the Toutle-Cowlitz River system. United States Geological Survey Professional Paper, 1447-A, 1–74.Google Scholar
Scott, K. M., Vallance, J. W., Kerle, N. et al. (2005). Catastrophic precipitation-triggered lahar at Casita volcano, Nicaragua: occurrence, bulking and transformation. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 30, 59–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharp, R. P. and Nobles, L. H. (1953). Mudflow of 1941 at Wrightwood, southern California. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 64, 547–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheridan, M. F., Stinton, A. J., Patra, A. et al. (2005). Evaluating Titan2D mass-flow model using the 1963 Little Tahoma Peak avalanches, Mount Rainier, Washington. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 139, 89–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, G. A. (1986). Coarse-grained nonmarine volcaniclastic sediment: Terminology and depositional processes. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 97, 1–10.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, G. A. and Fritz, W. J. (1989). Volcanic influences on terrestrial sedimentation. Geology, 17, 375–376.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stefanescu, E. R., Bursik, M., Dalbey, K. et al. (2010). DEM uncertainty and hazard analysis using a geophysical flow model. In International Congress on Environmental Modelling and Software, Ottawa, Canada, ed. Swayne, D.A., Yang, W., Voinov, A. A., Rizzoli, A., Filatova, T., S.03.01, .Google Scholar
Stevens, N. F., Manville, V. and Heron, D. W. (2002). The sensitivity of a volcanic flow model to digital elevation model accuracy: experiments with digitised map contours and interferometric SAR at Ruapehu and Taranaki volcanoes, New Zealand. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 119, 89–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoopes, G. R. and Sheridan, M. R. (1992). Giant debris avalanches from the Colima Volcanic Complex, Mexico: Implications for long runout landslides (> 100 km) and hazard assessment. Geology, 20, 299–302.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suryo, I. and Clarke, M. C. G. (1985). The occurrence and mitigation of volcanic hazards in Indonesia as exemplified at the Mount Merapi, Mount Kelut and Mount Galunggung volcanoes. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology, 18, 79–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suwa, H. (1989). Field observations of debris flow. Proceedings of the Japan-China (Taipei) Joint Seminar on Natural Hazard Mitigation, Kyoto, Japan, 343–352.Google Scholar
Suwa, H. and Okuda, S. (1985). Measurement of debris flows in Japan. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference and Field Workshop on Landslides, Tokyo, Japan, 391–400.Google Scholar
Suzuki, T., Hotta, N. and Miyamoto, K. (2009). Numerical simulation method of debris flow introducing the non-entrainment erosion rate equation at the transition point of the riverbed gradient or the channel width and in the area of Sabo dam. Shin Sabo, Journal of the Japan Society of Erosion Control Engineering, 62,14–22.Google Scholar
Swift, C. H. I. and Kresh, D. L. (1983). Mudflow Hazards Along the Toutle and Cowlitz Rivers from a Hypothetical Failure of Spirit Lake Blockage. United States Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigation Report 82–4125.
Takahashi, T. (1980). Debris flow on prismatic open channel. Journal of the Hydraulics Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, 106(HY3), 381–398.Google Scholar
Takahashi, T. (1991). Debris Flow. IAHR Monograph Series. Rotterdam: A. A. Balkema.Google Scholar
Takahashi, T. (2001). Mechanics and simulation of snow avalanches, pyroclastic flows and debris flows. In Particulate Gravity Currents, ed. McCaffrey, W. D., Kneller, B. C. and Peakall, J.. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 11–44.Google Scholar
Takahashi, T., Nakagawa, H., Harada, T. and Yamashiki, Y. (1992). Routing debris flows with particle segregation. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 118, 1490–1507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terzaghi, K. (1943). Theoretical Soil Mechanics. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Umbal, J. V. and Rodolfo, K. S. (1996). The 1991 lahars of southwestern Mount Pinatubo and evolution of the lahar-dammed Mapanuepe Lake. In Fire and Mud: Eruptions and Lahars of Mount Pinatubo, Philippines, ed. Newhall, C. G. and Punongbayan, R. S.. Seattle: University of Washington Press, pp. 951–970.Google Scholar
Vallance, J. W. (2000). Lahars. In Encyclopedia of Volcanoes, ed. Sigurdsson, H., Houghton, B., McNutt, S., Rymer, H. and Stix, J.. New York: Academic Press, pp. 601–616.Google Scholar
Vignaux, M. and Weir, G. J. (1990). A general model for Mt. Ruapehu lahars. Bulletin of Volcanology, 52, 381–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weir, G. J. (1982). Kinematic wave theory for Ruapehu lahars. New Zealand Journal of Science, 25, 197–203.Google Scholar
Wetmore, J. N. and Fread, D. L. (1984). The NWS Simplified Dam Break Flood Forecasting Model for Desk-top and Hand-held Microcomputers. Federal Emergency Management Agency.Google Scholar
Whipple, K. X. (1997). Open-channel flow of Bingham fluids: Applications in debris-flow research. Journal of Geology, 105, 243–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, R., Stinton, A. J. and Sheridan, M. F. (2008). Evaluation of the Titan2D two-phase flow model using an actual event: Case study of the 2005 Vazcún Valley lahar. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 177, 760–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witham, C. S. (2005). Volcanic disasters and incidents: A new database. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 148, 191–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Worni, R., Huggel, C., Stoffel, M. and Pulgarin, B. (2012). Challenges of modeling current very large lahars at Nevado del Huila, Colombia. Bulletin of Volcanology, 74, 309–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yano, K. and Daido, A. (1965). Fundamental study on mud-flow. Bulletin of the Disaster Prevention Research Institute, 14, 69–83.Google Scholar
Zanchetta, G., Sulpizio, R., Pareschi, M. T., Leoni, F. M. and Santacroce, R. (2004). Characteristics of May 5–6, 1998 volcaniclastic debris flows in the Sarno area (Campania, southern Italy): relationships to structural damage and hazard zonation. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 133, 377–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zanuttigh, B. and Ghilardi, P. (2010). Segregation process of water-granular mixtures released down a steep chute. Journal of Hydrology, 391, 175–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×