Abstract
In order to provide a comprehensive comparison between two current numerical methods employed in the modeling of rock avalanches, the Discrete Element Method (DEM) [3] and the Material Point Method (MPM) [1] were used to simulate the mass propagation along a 45° plane transitioning to an horizontal plane. When using the DEM, a 3D code using tetrahedral elements was used and the flow was channelized by means of frictionless walls. For the MPM simulations, a 2D code was developed and plane strain simulations were run. Comparisons were made in terms of run-out distance and energy dissipated. Influence of parameters such as initial sample geometry, basal friction coefficient and shape of blocks composing the sample was studied.
Highlights
Numerical studies involving Discrete Element Method (DEM) and Material Point Method (MPM) were carried out in order to test the ability and the relevance of two kinds of numerical methods to reproduce the kinematics of granular avalanches
The results obtained in terms of propagation and spreading of the mass, and total dissipation modes are summarized in Table 5 for both MPM and DEM simulations
The use of the material point method has been evaluated in the case of a flow in the transient regime that involves finite strains
Summary
Numerical studies involving DEM and MPM were carried out in order to test the ability and the relevance of two kinds of numerical methods (discrete and continuous methods) to reproduce the kinematics of granular avalanches (propagation distances and amounts of dissipated energies). The MPM was chosen over the continuum-based methods because of its hybrid Lagrangian and Eulerian descriptions, which gives it the ability to manage naturally large deformations. This makes it an ideal method for the modeling of granular avalanches involving large masses. The complex rheologies inherent in granular materials, are naturally well captured by the DEM – provided that a minimum set of features are taken into account In our case, these features are the block shapes and adequate dissipative contact models. A total of 27 configurations were setup using both numerical methods in order to study the influence of parameters such as initial sample geometry, basal friction coefficient and shape of blocks composing the sample (the latter affecting DEM only)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
