D1.7 – Landslide Runout Modelling and Propagation Simulation

SafeLand FP7 Deliverable Archive – Post-Failure Hazard Dynamics

Deliverable D1.7 of the :contentReference[oaicite:0]{index=0} reviews modelling approaches used to simulate landslide runout behaviour after slope failure occurs.

The document focuses on propagation dynamics of rapid mass movements including rock avalanches, debris flows, and granular flow phenomena relevant to European hazard assessment.


Main Objective

The primary objective of D1.7 is to provide a synthesis of runout modelling methods that balance physical realism and computational efficiency.

The report evaluates empirical, analytical, and numerical simulation frameworks used for hazard zoning and quantitative risk assessment.


Runout Modelling Approaches

Three main modelling categories are discussed.

Empirical Models

  • Angle-of-reach methods
  • Mass volume–distance relationships
  • Historical event back-analysis

Analytical Models

  • Energy conservation approaches
  • Momentum balance formulations
  • Simplified mobility estimation

Numerical Models

  • Depth-integrated 2D/3D simulations
  • Particle-based SPH methods
  • Continuum flow solvers

Common modelling tools referenced include DAN3D, RAMMS, and SPH-based geoflow simulation systems.


Rheological Behaviour and Mobility Mechanisms

Runout behaviour depends strongly on material rheology.

  • Frictional flow models (φ ≈ 5–35°)
  • Voellmy friction–turbulence models
  • Bingham and Herschel–Bulkley viscoplastic models

Typical parameter ranges include μ = 0.02–0.1 and turbulence coefficients ξ ≈ 500–2000 m/s² for certain flow types.


Geological and Environmental Influences

Lithology and Terrain Structure

  • Volcanic and carbonate rock behaviour
  • Digital elevation model resolution sensitivity
  • Surface roughness effects

Simulation results can vary when DEM grid size changes between 30–90 m resolution.

Hydrological Effects

  • Pore pressure enhancement
  • Water entrainment during flow propagation
  • Snow and glacier material mixing

European Case Study References

Back-analysis validation was performed using several historical and scientific cases including:

  • Frank Slide (Canada, mobility benchmark)
  • Thurwieser rock avalanche (Alps)
  • Selected volcanic collapse scenarios
  • Debris flow propagation events

Glacial environments often exhibit enhanced mobility due to ice–rock interaction processes.


Technical Keywords

  • Runout modelling
  • Frictional rheology
  • Voellmy flow formulation
  • Depth-integrated simulation
  • Debris avalanche propagation
  • Rock avalanche mobility
  • DEM resolution sensitivity
  • Entrainment dynamics
  • QRA vulnerability modelling
  • Glacial mass movement simulation

Role Within SafeLand Research Framework

Deliverable D1.7 contributes to Work Area 1 hazard science by improving understanding of post-failure landslide propagation processes.

Runout modelling supports hazard zoning, infrastructure protection planning, and early warning system boundary estimation.


Archive Integration Notes

  • Provide PDF download or viewer embed where copyright allows.
  • Add metadata tags: SafeLand FP7, D1.7, landslide runout modelling.
  • Link internally to triggering models, rainfall threshold research, and monitoring clusters.
  • Ensure accessibility compliance for figures and simulation visuals.

Landslide runout modelling is essential for understanding the spatial extent and intensity of mass movement hazards after slope failure initiation. While models improve hazard estimation, prediction uncertainty remains due to complex terrain and material behaviour interactions.