Comparing single‐phase, non‐Newtonian approaches with experimental results: Validating flume‐scale mud and debris flow in HEC‐RAS

Abstract

AbstractPost‐fire debris flows and tailing impoundment failures destroy lives and property. These geologic hazards – and other similar processes – fall on a continuum between classic Newtonian flood analyses and geotechnical stability analyses. The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is developing a non‐Newtonian library (DebrisLib) that includes a suite of rheological and clastic approaches to hyper‐concentrated, mudflow and debris flow dynamics. The Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC) has implemented these non‐Newtonian methods into the widely used, public‐domain open‐channel hydraulics and morphodynamic software, HEC‐RAS (river analysis system). This work presents part of the verification and validation of these non‐Newtonian approaches, applying several rheological equations to published laboratory results high‐concentration flume experiments.This study tested the linear Bingham model as well as the turbulent and Bagnold quadratic terms of the O'Brien equation. HEC‐RAS also includes the non‐linear Herschel–Bulkley (HB) approach, which quantifies shear‐thickening or shear‐thinning processes. The study used these non‐Newtonian models in HEC‐RAS to simulate 10 of Parsons et al.’s (2001) flume experiments, which measured the snout and plug velocity of fluids with high solid concentrations (Cv = 68–74%) and a broad range of material gradations (d50 = 0.05–1 mm, d15 = 0.006–0.1 mm). The experiments also measured and back‐calculated Bingham and HB parameters of the materials, finding HB powers between 0.45 and 1.25 (i.e. fluids that are dilatant, pseudo‐plastic and visco‐plastic).The rheological models incorporated into DebrisLib and implemented in HEC‐RAS reproduce experimental data well for most experiments. The Bingham model generated a plug velocity root‐mean‐square error (RMSE) of 0.21 m/s using standard flow parameters and Parsons et al.’s calibrated parameters, a substantial improvement over the unmodified shallow water flow equations (RMSE 0.77 m/s). Experiments with strong snout effects tended to generate higher residuals, especially in the snout velocity. The RMSE associated with the O'Brien equation was larger with the Parsons et al. fit parameters, but similar (0.23 m/s) with measured parameters. The turbulent parameter was the largest (often the dominant) parameter in most O'Brien simulations, with the dispersive stress only proving significant for the coarsest material. DebrisLib had to use a modified version of the dispersive term to simulate these concentrations. Both the 2D depth‐averaged shallow water equation (SWE) and diffusion wave equation were used to simulate the experiments. The best results were obtained with the SWE with horizontal mixing.