Field and laboratory investigations of runout distances of debris ows in the

Dolomites (Eastern Italian Alps)

Vincenzo D'Agostino
a,
, Matteo Cesca
a,1
, Lorenzo Marchi
b,2
a
Department of Land and Agro-Forest Environments, University of Padova, Agripolis, Viale dell'Universit 16, 35020 Legnaro (Padova), Italy
b
CNR-IRPI, Corso Stati Uniti 4, 35127 Padova, Italy
a b s t r a c t a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 22 December 2007
Received in revised form 30 April 2008
Accepted 15 June 2009
Available online xxxx
Keywords:
Alluvial fan
Debris ow
Runout distance
Laboratory ume
Alps
The estimation of runout distances on fans has a major role in assessing debris-ow hazards. Different methods
have been devised for this purpose: volume balance, limiting topographic methods, empirical equations, and
physical approaches. Data collected from eld observations are the basis for developing, testing, and improving
predictive methods, while laboratory tests on small-scale models are another suitable approach for studying
debris-owrunout under controlled conditions and for developing predictive equations. This paper analyses the
problemof assessing runout distance, focusingonsix debris ows that were triggeredonJuly 5th, 2006by intense
rainfall near Cortina d'Ampezzo (Dolomites, north-eastern Italy). Detailed eld surveys were carried out
immediately after the event in the triggering zone, along the channels, and in the deposition areas. A ne-scale
digital terrain model of the study area was established by aerial LiDAR measurements. Total travel and runout
distances on fans measured in the eld were compared with the results of formulae from the literature
(empirical/statistical and physically oriented), and samples of sediment collected from deposition lobes were
used for laboratory tests. The experimental device employed in the tests consists of a tilting ume with an
inclinationfrom0 to 38, onwhicha steel tank witha removable gate was installedat variable distances fromthe
outlet. A nal horizontal plane works as the deposition area. Samples of different volumes and variable sediment
concentrations were tested. Multipleregressionanalysis was usedtoassess thelengthof the deposits as a function
of boththe potential energyof the mass andthesediment concentrationof theow. Our comparisonof the results
of laboratory tests with eld data suggests that an energy-based runout formula might predict the runout
distances of debris ows in the Dolomites.
2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Debris ows are one of the most important formative processes of
alluvial fans under various climatic conditions. They can transport and
deposit large amounts of water and solid material in short time
intervals, creating a major hazard for people and structures.
The assessment of runout distance, i.e. the length travelled on an
alluvial fan by a debris ow from the initiation of the deposits until
their lowest point, is of utmost importance for delineating the areas at
risk fromdebris ows. Another key parameter in debris-owstudies is
the total travel distance (the distance from the initiation of the debris
ow to the lowest point of deposition). Methods for determining
debris-ow runout distance and total travel distance can be based on
eld data as well as on data generated by physical models. By
combining these two sources of data, a promising approach emerges
for rening the methods for assessing runout distance on alluvial fans.
This paper contributes to the assessment of debris-ow runout
distance on fans and total travel distance by integrating eld
measurements and laboratory tests on a tilting plane rheometer. The
study methods were applied to six debris ows of the Dolomites
(eastern Italian Alps). Field surveys and a hydrological analysis made
it possible to assess the principal parameters relevant for the analysis
of runout distance. Samples taken from the debris-ow deposits were
used to analyse the depositional processes on the tilting plane
rheometer; both quasi-static tests of fan formation and dynamic tests
using a ume were carried out. Field data on runout distance and total
travel distance were compared with both empiricalstatistical and
dynamic methods for runout assessment, and with predictive
equations developed from the laboratory test.
This paper is divided into seven sections. Section 2 describes the
principal methods available for assessing runout distance and total
travel distance. Section 3 presents the study area, the eld surveys, and
the hydrological analysis implemented for assessing the main variables
Geomorphology xxx (2009) xxxxxx
Corresponding author. University of Padova, Department of Land and Agro-Forest
Environments, Agripolis, Viale dell'Universit 16, 35020 Legnaro (PD), Italy. Tel.: +39
0498272682; fax: +39 0498272686.
E-mail addresses: vincenzo.dagostino@unipd.it (V. D'Agostino),
matteo.cesca@unipd.it (M. Cesca), lorenzo.marchi@irpi.cnr.it (L. Marchi).
1
Tel.: +39 0498272700; fax: +39 0498272686.
2
Tel.: +39 0498295825; fax: +39 0498295827.
GEOMOR-03031; No of Pages 11
0169-555X/$ see front matter 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.06.032
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Geomorphology
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er. com/ l ocat e/ geomor ph
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Please cite this article as: D'Agostino, V., et al., Field and laboratory investigations of runout distances of debris ows in the Dolomites
(Eastern Italian Alps), Geomorphology (2009), doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.06.032
of the debris ows studied. Section 4 reports the results of applying
methods from previously published literature. Section 5 describes the
laboratory tests. Finally, Sections 6 and 7 discuss the results and summa-
rise the conclusions of the study, respectively.
2. Methods for assessing debris-ow runout
Several authors have proposed methods for assessing runout
distances (e.g., Hungr et al., 1984; Cannon, 1989; Bathurst et al., 1997;
Fannin and Wise, 2001; McDougall and Hungr, 2003). Rickenmann
(2005) classies the methods for predicting the runout distance into
empiricalstatistical and dynamic methods. A more detailed classi-
cation of the approaches in the literature includes volume balance
approaches, limiting topographic methods, other empirical equations,
physically-oriented methods, and laboratory studies.
a) Volume balance approach
Volume balance methods predict ooded area (A) as a function of
total volume (V):
A = kV
d
1
where k and d are empirical coefcients.
Iverson et al. (1998) proposed a method that has received
signicant attention; it predicts the valley cross-sectional area and
planimetric area inundated by lahars fromlahar volume on the basis of
two semi-empirical equations. Iverson et al. (1998) developed the
equation A=200V
2/3
using data from27 lahars at nine volcanoes with
volumes from 810
4
to 410
9
m
3
. A similar equation (A=6.2V
2/3
)
was calculated by Crosta et al. (2003) for 116 debris ows in the Italian
Alps. These authors observed that the empirical coefcient k is
predominantly dependent on the characteristics of the debris-ow
material. Berti and Simoni (2007) studied forty debris-ow basins
withmetamorphic andsedimentary lithologies inthe ItalianAlps, with
debris-owvolumes up to 50,000 m
3
. They conrmed that there was a
signicant correlation between ooded area and volume.
b) Limiting topographic methods
Limiting topographic methods are primarily related to the fan slope S
d
or to parameters related to the energy dissipated along the depositional
path (Vandre, 1985; Ikeya, 1989; Burton and Bathurst, 1998).
Ikeya (1989) proposed a limiting topographic method based on fan
slope. The angle after deposition ranged from 2 to 12 with a modal
value between 4 and 6; the spread channel width ratio (the ratio
between deposition width to channel width upstream of the fan) is,
on average, equal to 5 and generally assumes a value lower than 10.
Vandre (1985) proposed an empirical approach to estimate the
runout distance of a debris ow:
R = H 2
where R is the runout distance, is the elevation difference between
the initiation point and the point where deposition starts and is an
empirical constant. According to Vandre's data, the value of is 0.4
(i.e. the runout distance is 40% of the elevation difference H).
A runout criterion based empirically on Eq. (2) was proposed by
Burton and Bathurst (1998). A debris ow stops when the following
condition is met:
Distance travelled on slopes
between 4 and 10

N 0:4
Elevation lost
on slopes N 10

3
where travel distances are measured along the slope. The potential
trajectory of the debris owstarts at the initiationpoint and progresses in
the channel network until possible depositionoccurs. The rules appliedto
govern debris ow transport and sediment deposition are as follows:
for slopes greater than 10, the debris owcontinues unconditionally;
for slopes between 4 and 10, the debris ow comes to a halt either if
the condition expressed by Eq. (2) is satised or upon reaching the 4
slope; and
for slopes less than 4, the debris ow halts unconditionally and
deposits all remaining material.
c) Empirical equations
Empirical equations use variables, such as debris ow volume (V),
potential mass energy (H), fan slope (S
d
), upstream gradient (
u
),
mean slope angle of the whole path (), and catchment area (A
C
), to
predict the runout distance on the fan and the total travel distance.
The mobility ratio (H/L; see notation for symbols), termed the
effective friction angle (Heim, 1882), has been recently applied by a
number of authors (e.g., Corominas, 1996; Toyos et al., 2007) as a
measure of mobility. According to a personal communication of
Takahashi, Bathurst et al. (1997) assumed that H/L=tan =0.20,
very close to the minimum value (tan =0.19) obtained by
Rickenmann and Zimmermann (1993). The mobility index roughly
correlates with the volume of the ow(Iverson, 1997) and can be used
to approximate the maximum potential runout of debris ows.
Table 1 summarizes some well-known empirical equations used to
assess runout distance and total travel distance. The relationships, Eqs.
(4)(8), are mainly based on eld data and often include the debris-
owvolume (V) as an independent variable coupled to morphometric
information (H, S
d
=tan
d
,
u
, , A
C
, Fig. 1).
d) Physically-oriented methods
Dynamic methods consider mass, momentumand energy conserva-
tion to simulate the propagation of debris ows using 1D or 2D models
(O'Brien et al., 1993; Hungr, 1995; Iverson and Denlinger, 2001; Laigle
et al., 2003). Numerical models may adopt a variety of hypotheses for
solvingthe motionequations, andtake intoaccount different rheological
models of the material involved. Based on a momentum consideration
Table 1
Empirical equations used to compute runout distance R and total travel distance L of
debris ows.
Variable Empirical equation Authors Eq.
Runout (R) R = 8:6V tanu
0:42
Ikeya (1989)
a
(4)
R = 25V
0:3
Rickenmann (1994)
b
(5)
R = 15V
1=3
Rickenmann (1999) (6)
Travel distance
(L)
H=L
min
= tan
min
= 0:20A
C

0:26
Zimmermann et al.
(1997)
(7)
L = 1:9V
0:16
H
0:83
Rickenmann (1999) (8)
a
Mathematical rearrangement from the original form (in Bathurst et al., 1997).
b
Personal communication in Bathurst et al. (1997).
Fig. 1. Idealized debris ow labelled with the parameters involved in the empirical
relationships.
2 V. D'Agostino et al. / Geomorphology xxx (2009) xxxxxx
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Please cite this article as: D'Agostino, V., et al., Field and laboratory investigations of runout distances of debris ows in the Dolomites
(Eastern Italian Alps), Geomorphology (2009), doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.06.032
for a owtravellingover a surfacewithconstant slope, the runout length
R can be described by the following theoretical equation developed by
Hungr et al. (1984) and Takahashi (1991):
R =
fu
u
cos
u

d
1 + gh
u
cos
u
=2u
2
u
g
2
gS
f
cos
d
sin
d

9
where
d
=the terrain slope angle along the area of deposition,
u
=
the entry channel slope angle, u
u
=entry velocity, h
u
=entry ow
depth, and S
f
=the friction slope, which is assumed to be constant
along the runout path and accounts only for sliding friction. The model
assumes a constant discharge from upstream and no change in ow
width after the break in slope.
Hungr et al. (1984) assumed the friction slope angle of 10 and
reported a good agreement between observed values of R and those
predicted by Eq. (9) for ve debris ows in western Canada. However,
when Eq. (9) is applied to 14 debris ows in Japan using measured ow
quantities (Okuda and Suwa, 1984), better predictions of R are obtained
for S
f
=f tan
d
(with f =1.12) rather than arctan (S
f
)=10. The
application of Eq. (9) to Swiss debris ows from 1987 (Rickenmann,
2005) also predicts reasonable runout lengths using S
f
=1.08 tan
d
,
when observed ow depths are used to estimate the entry velocity u
u
.
For the back analysis of the Japanese andSwiss data, it was assumedthat
the main surge travelled in the existing channel on the fan to the lowest
point of deposition with essentially no change in ow width.
e) Laboratory studies
Post-event surveys allow researchers to detect only debris-ow
features visible after the end of the processes, such as erosional scars,
ow marks, and deposits. Field monitoring in instrumented areas is an
invaluablewaytogather dataondebris-owdynamics (Okudaet al., 1980;
Genevois et al., 2000; Arattano and Marchi, 2008; Hrlimannet al., 2003).
However, eld monitoring of debris ows is expensive and time-
consuming, and is only convenient for sites that show both a high
frequency of events and favourable logistical conditions. To overcome
these issues, several authors have used laboratory umes (small-scale
model experiments) in order to simulate debris-ow deposition
(Mizuyama and Uehara, 1983; Van Steijn and Coutard, 1989; Liu, 1996;
Deganutti et al., 2003; Ghilardi et al., 2003). Quantities such as ow
velocity, the shape of deposits, deposited volume, and grain-size
distribution can be measured and controlled in the laboratory tests.
Problems of scale are relevant for physicallysimulating these phenomena:
with only a few exceptions (for example the USGS experimental debris-
owume, 95 mlong and 2 mwide; Major, 1997), channels are typically
narrower than 0.5 m and up to a few meters long; the volume of source
material is generallylower than0.1 m
3
, anddebris mixtures arecommonly
restrictedtoclay, sand, or muddysandslurries. This notwithstanding, tests
in laboratory umes make it possible to analyse the relations between
physical variables of debris ows under controlledconditions, andprovide
useful data for developing and testing predictive methods.
3. Case study: Fiames debris ows of July 5th, 2006
3.1. Study area
The debris ow studied in this paper occurred in Fiames, a locality
of the Dolomites (eastern Italian Alps), near the town of Cortina
Fig. 2. Location of the study area with rock basins and debris-ow deposits highlighted.
3 V. D'Agostino et al. / Geomorphology xxx (2009) xxxxxx
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Please cite this article as: D'Agostino, V., et al., Field and laboratory investigations of runout distances of debris ows in the Dolomites
(Eastern Italian Alps), Geomorphology (2009), doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.06.032
d'Ampezzo. An intense rainstorm triggered six debris ows in the
afternoon of July 5th, 2006.
Three main morphological units can be identied in the study area
(shown in Fig. 2). Rock basins, composed of dolomite, are present in the
upper part. A thick talus, consisting of particles fromsilt to boulders (up
to 12 m in size), is situated below the rock cliffs (Figs. 3, 4). The lower
part of the slope is occupied by coalescing fans built by debris ows,
whose initiationpoints are located at the contact between the rock cliffs
and the scree slope (Fig. 4).
The areas of the rock basins range from 0.024 to 0.182 km
2
, the
maximumelevations are between 1984 and 2400 ma.s.l., and the mini-
mum elevations, which correspond to the initiation areas of the debris
ows, are between 1521 and 1624 ma.s.l. The channel lengths vary
between 110 and 540 m and the mean channel slope between 22 and
28. The climatic conditions are typical of an alpine environment: the
annual precipitation at Cortina d'Ampezzo ranges between 900 and
1500 mm, with an average of 1100 mm. Snowfall occurs normally from
October to May, and intense summer thunderstorms are common and
constitute a maximum in the seasonal precipitation regime.
3.2. Field surveys
Immediately after the debris ows of July 2006, eld surveys were
carried out in the study area. These eld surveys made it possible to
measure several features of debris-ow deposits: mean and max-
imumdepth, depths and slopes of deposition lobes, and cross-sections
of the deposits (Fig. 3). Moreover, cross-sections were measured along
the main channel and detailed descriptions of debris-ow initiation
areas were made (Fig. 4). The grain size distribution was assessed:
i) by means of transect-line measurements on the surfaces of terminal
deposition lobes (84% ner than 0.09 m for the nest sample and
0.17 m for the coarsest); ii) by direct measurements of the largest
deposited boulders (1.0 to 1.4 m; intermediate axis); and iii) by
processing photographs of vertical trenches and assessing the
proportion of sediments with diameters ner than 2 cm (estimated
range from 25 to 40% by weight). The boundaries of the debris-ow
deposits were mapped using a hand-held GPS; the other geometric
characteristics were measured using a laser range nder and a tape.
LiDAR and photographic data were acquired from a helicopter
ying at an average altitude of 1000 m above ground level during
snow free conditions in October 2006. The ying speed was 80kn, the
scan angle was 20, and the scan rate was 71KHz. The survey design
Fig. 3. Debris-ow deposition area (basin 5).
Fig. 4. Debris-ow channel close to the triggering area (basin 3).
4 V. D'Agostino et al. / Geomorphology xxx (2009) xxxxxx
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Please cite this article as: D'Agostino, V., et al., Field and laboratory investigations of runout distances of debris ows in the Dolomites
(Eastern Italian Alps), Geomorphology (2009), doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.06.032
point density was specied to be greater than 5 points per m
2
. LiDAR
point measurements were ltered into returns from vegetation and
bare ground using TerrascanTM software classication routines and
algorithms. A comparison between LiDAR and ground GPS elevation
points carried out in a neighbouring basin showed a vertical accuracy
of 0.1 m.
3.3. Event reconstruction
The debris ows of July 5th, 2006 were triggered by an intense
thunderstorm and hailstorm from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m. (Central European
Summer Time). The highest values of rainfall intensity during the
event were 12.5 mm/5 min and 64 mm/h. These values were
measured at a meteorological station located about 1 km from the
study area and are the highest values ever measured at this station
since it began operating in 1984. After the event, many hailstones
covered the slopes for about 2h. The debris ows blocked the National
Road and a bicycle trail (located on a former railway track) (Fig. 2).
Local lowslopes next to the bicycle trail and the National Road helped
slow down and deposit the debris ows.
The debris ows initiated at the outlet of the rock basins by the
mobilization of loose debris into a ow with progressive entrainment
of debris from channel bank erosion and bed scour (Fig. 4). The main
channel stopped (between 1441 and 1553 ma.s.l.) where the slope
angle decreases and the depositional zone starts.
The deposited volume was assessed by subtracting the 5meter grid
digital terrain model of the deposits (LiDAR data) from the pre-event
topographic surface, tted from a topographic map at a scale of
1:5000. The results were checked at sample areas in the eld and a
vertical accuracy of 0.10 m was inferred.
Water runoff from the rock basins was simulated by means of a
kinematic hydrological model that integrates the US Soil Conservation
Service-Curve Number (SCS-CN) method (Soil Conservation Service,
1956, 1964, 1969, 1971, 1972, 1985, 1993) with a geomorphologic unit
hydrograph (Chowet al., 1988). The SCS-CNmethod is one of the most
popular methods for assessing direct surface runoff from rainfall data
through a weighted value of the CN parameter of the basin. The
adopted unit hydrograph is extracted from the hypsographic curve by
assuming equivalence between the contour lines and lines with the
same concentration time (Viparelli, 1963). We calculated the
corresponding CN values on the basis of the geological setting and
land use of the six basins upstream of the triggering point (Soil
Conservation Service, 1993). Under normal antecedent moisture
conditions, the obtained CN values are around CN=85. The second
SCS parametric variable to compute surface runoff involves initial
abstraction, accounting for depression storage, interception, and
inltration before runoff begins. Its value was set to 10% of potential
maximum retention (directly expressed by the CN) following the
suggestion of Aron et al. (1977) and the assumption of Gregoretti and
Dalla Fontana (2008) in the hydrologic modelling of headwater basins
of the Dolomites. The concentration time was evaluated as the ratio
between the main channel length and the ow velocity along the
slopes (assumed to be equal to 2 m/s).
Subsequently, the following relation was adopted for assessing
debris-owdischarge fromthe water ooddischarge (Takahashi, 1978):
Q
d
=
Q
w
1
c
e
c

10
where Q
d
is the debris-ow discharge associated with the liquid
discharge Q
w
, andc

andc
e
are the in situ volumetric concentrations of
bed sediments before the ood and the debris-ow sediment
concentration at equilibrium conditions, respectively. Eq. (10) refers to
a debris owgenerated by sudden release of Q
w
fromthe upstreamend
of an erodible and saturated grain bed. The assumption in Eq. (10) of a
constant ratio c
e
/c
*
for the entire duration of the ood would be too
severe a hypothesis in relation to the type of debris-owsurges observed
inthe streams of the Dolomites (D'Agostino andMarchi, 2003). Therefore,
the debris-ow graph was computed from the hydrograph plotted,
assuming a linear variation of c
e
/c
*
in Eq. (10) from a minimum (c
e min
=
0.2) to a maximumvalue (c
e max
incorrespondence toQ
w
at the peak). The
concentrationc
e max
was calibrated to match the sediment volumes of the
debris-owdeposits estimated by means of the LiDARdata and it resulted
in a range of 0.630.72 (mean of 0.69). Table 2 also reports, for each
catchment, the basin area A
C
, the deposited volume V, the ooded area A,
the mean thickness h, the debris-owsediment concentration at the peak
(c
e max
) and the corresponding debris-ow discharge Q
d max
. The mean
thickness of the debris-ow deposits is the ratio between the deposited
volume and the ooded area.
Table 3 presents the main geometric features related to the runout
and the channel reach bounded by the debris-ow triggering point
and the cross-section where deposition starts.
4. Application of runout and travel distance prediction methods
The methods for assessing runout lengthandtravel distance described
in Section 2 of this paper were applied to the eld data of the Fiames
debris ows. The results are discussed in the following paragraphs.
a) Volume balance approach
Using the scheme of Eq. (1), we computed an empirical mobility
relationship for the Fiames debris ows (Fig. 5); the relationship
displays high coefcient of determination (R
2
=0.92) and has a value
of k equal to to 14.2 for d=2/3. According to Crosta et al. (2003) and
Berti and Simoni (2007), k is almost constant in each lithological
context and reects yield stress and mobility of the owing mass.
b) Limiting topographic methods
The debris ows of Fiames decelerate and stop at slopes higher
(Table 3) than those assumed by the methods proposed by Ikeya (1989)
and Burton and Bathurst (1998). Neither method is applicable to the
Fiames case study. Suchbehaviour canbe ascribedto a highly dissipative
Table 2
Basin area A
C
, depositedvolume V, planimetric ooded area A, meanthickness h (volume V
divided by the area of deposition), maximum debris-ow sediment concentration
at equilibrium conditions c
e max
and hydrologic estimation of the debris-ow peak
discharge Q
d max
for each basin; [Q
d max
] is computed with the Mizuyama et al. (1992)
equation: [Q
d max
]=0.0188V
0.79
.
Basin A
c
(km
2
) V (m
3
) A (m
2
) h (m) c
e max
() Q
d max
(m
3
s
1
)
[Q
d max
]
(m
3
s
1
)
1 0.182 15,000 10,116 1.39 0.665 32 37
2 0.087 10,600 8543 1.19 0.700 21 28
3 0.147 46,800 16,934 2.57 0.710 100 92
4 0.092 11,000 6785 1.50 0.700 22 29
5 0.091 5200 4609 1.00 0.630 12 16
6 0.024 2100 3751 0.50 0.725 16 8
Table 3
Main topographic characteristics of the Fiames case study: channel length L
C
and mean
width B
c
, upstream channel slope
u
, slope of depositional zone
d
, average slope angle
of the whole path , sloped runout length R, horizontal travel distance L and associated
total drop H, and estimated peak velocity u
u
of the surge in the channel.
Basin L
C
(m)
B
C
(m)

u
()

d
()

()
R
(m)
L
(m)
H
(m)
H
(m)
u
u
(m/s)
1 109 15.5 23.3 19.3 20.1 394 472 43 173 4.17
2 241 11.7 21.9 16.2 18.2 427 634 90 209 3.89
3 539 9.9 21.9 16.0 19.7 312 800 201 287 6.93
4 189 12.2 23.0 21.2 21.9 329 481 74 193 3.96
5 144 12.5 21.6 21.4 21.5 129 254 53 100 3.15
6 238 6.04 27.9 25.9 27.0 183 375 111 191 4.78
5 V. D'Agostino et al. / Geomorphology xxx (2009) xxxxxx
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Please cite this article as: D'Agostino, V., et al., Field and laboratory investigations of runout distances of debris ows in the Dolomites
(Eastern Italian Alps), Geomorphology (2009), doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.06.032
debris owandlarge roughness of the terrain. Applying Eq. (2) produces
nonphysical R values (1/4 to 1/20 of observations), because the partial
drop measured in the eld is very limited (Table 3).
c) Empirical equations
Eq. (5) tends to overestimate the runout distance, so it can be deemed
conservative in the dolomitic environment (Fig. 6). The recalibrated
Rickenmann (1999) formula (Eq. 6) gives fairly satisfactory results, but it
underpredicts the distances intwocases. The Ikeya (1989) relation(Eq. 4)
shows a similar pattern (Fig. 6), but it has a more marked tendency to
underestimate R. These ndings are not surprising, because even though
Eq. (4) is usually appliedindifferent topographic conditions, Ikeya (1989)
suggested its use when the top portion of the fan is less than 8, whereas
the Fiames alluvial fans are much steeper (Table 3).
The empirical equations for assessing total travel distance agree
well with observed values (Fig. 7). Eq. (7) in particular provides a
correct estimate of the measured values in the study area. Considering
the high fan slope and the L observed values, it is likely that the
rheology expresses high basal shear stresses. Eq. (8) also gives values
that agree fairly well, but it is implicit and the results are too positively
affected by the use of observed H values.
d) Physically-oriented methods
The application of Eq. (9) requires that there be no signicant
change in ow width moving from the entry channel to the fan area.
The observed depositional forms make this conditionpossible (Fig. 2);
it is also supported by the fact that deposits are elongate with a spread
width to runout length ratio close to 0.15.
In order to calibrate Eq. (9) with the data in Tables 2 and 3, we
must rst make a preliminary computation of the entering velocity u
u
and the assessment of S
f
or the parameter f if we set S
f
=f tan
d
. We
evaluated u
u
for the peak discharges (Table 2) using the Chzy equation
(u
u
=C g
1/2
h
u
1/2
sin
u
1/2
; C=dimensionless Chzy's roughness) adapted
tothesurgemotionof debris ows (Rickenmann, 1999). Gregoretti (2000)
analyzedthe neighbouring basinof Acquabona (Genevois et al., 2000) and
came up with a C value close to 3 when the ratio of ow depth to
intermediate diameter of the front sediments is less than 3 and the
channel bed is not congested with loose debris before the surge transit
(both conditions agree with the Fiames event). After computing u
u
with
C=3 (Table 3), the iterative solution of Eq. (9) for the unknown S
f
, where
R is the measured runout distance, gives six f values in the range 1.016
1.072, with a mean value f =1.030. The relationship can be adequately
calibrated, but is too sensitive to f variations to the third decimal place
when, as in our case study, the upstreamslope
u
and the fan slope
d
are
very close.
5. Laboratory tests
Twenty-nine tests were carried out using a tilting-plane rheometer
(Fig. 8a): twenty tests simulated the quasi-static formation of a fan, and
the remaining nine examined dynamic fan formation by the means of a
ume.
5.1. Experimental device
The physical model consists of a 2 m1 m tilting plane with an
inclination() between0 and38, onwhichasteel tankwitharemovable
gatewas installed. Axedhorizontal plane (1.5 m1 m), withanarticial
roughness (Fig. 8b) to simulate the natural basal friction, served as the
deposition area.
The quasi-static tests of fan formation were performed by installing
the tank at the lower end of the tilting plane, i.e. without a ume (Fig. 8a).
The steel tank, with a removable gate facing the deposition plane, is a
parallelepipedwitha square base (15 cm15 cm; 33 cmhigh) andwitha
maximum usable volume of 7 dm
3
.
Dynamic fan formation was simulated using an articial ume
installed on the tilting plane (Fig. 9).
The width of the ume is 0.15 m, and it is between 0 and 180 cm
long, depending on the tank position. The articial channel bottom is
composed of a steel plate with an articial roughness (Fig. 10a); four
datum lines were painted on the bottom (Fig. 10b).
Fig. 6. Comparison of runout distances observed in the eld with those calculated using
the relationships shown in Table 1 for the six studied debris ows.
Fig. 7. Comparison of travel distances observed in the eld with those calculated using
the relationships shown in Table 1 for the six studied debris ows.
Fig. 5. Relationship between debris-ow volume and ooded area.
6 V. D'Agostino et al. / Geomorphology xxx (2009) xxxxxx
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Please cite this article as: D'Agostino, V., et al., Field and laboratory investigations of runout distances of debris ows in the Dolomites
(Eastern Italian Alps), Geomorphology (2009), doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.06.032
5.2. Tests
The laboratory tests were carried out using debris-ow matrix
collected from lobes in the Fiames fan area. This matrix corresponds,
on average, to 30% by weight of the eld deposits. In the laboratory
tests, samples of debris-ow matrix with maximum diameters up to
19 mm were used (Fig. 11); ne material (b0.04 mm) amounts to
28.6%. The tested material has a density of 2.55 g/cm
3
, a porosity of
25%, an angle of friction of 40 and a mean diameter of 2.14 mm.
Eight quasi-static simulations were performed using a constant
total volume of 3 dm
3
to simulate solid concentrations by volume of
45% and 50%; in the remaining twelve quasi-static tests, a constant
solid volume of 3 dm
3
was used, and varying amounts of water were
added to obtain solid concentrations by volume of 55%, 60%, and 67%.
The gradients of the tilting plane were 0, 5, 10, and 15. In the nine
dynamic runs, a constant total volume of 5.5 dm
3
was used and the
solid concentrations by volume were 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, and 65%; the
ume length was 1.8 m with a constant slope of 15.
Each of the tests followed the same procedure: the material was
placed in the steel tank, the plane was tilted to the chosen slope and the
gate was quickly removedfromthe tank. The maximumrunout distance
(R) and maximum lateral width of deposit (B
max
) were directly
measured during the tests; the area of deposit (A) was measured from
orthophotos of the deposition area. Data measured during the labo-
ratory tests are reported in Table 4.
5.3. Data analysis and application
Fig. 12 shows the geometric parameters involved in the laboratory
data analysis: total drop (H), runout distance (R), total travel distance
(L), distance travelled in the ume by the debris-ow mixture (L
F
),
upstreampoint of the mass (t), inclination of the tilting-plane (), and
the angle of the frictional energy line (). The total drop H, related to
, was found to be more signicant if computed with respect to the
upstream point of mass (t). It is useful to dene the correspondence
between eld characteristics of debris ows and laboratory tests. The
initiation area corresponds to the point where the steel tank is
installed, the channel length (L
C
) corresponds to the distance travelled
in the ume by the debris-ow mixture (L
F
), and the upstream
channel slope (
u
) is the inclination of the tilting-plane ().
Analysing the variation of as a function of C
V
, different trends
result for quasi-static and dynamic tests (Fig. 13). Higher values in
the dynamic tests explain the larger expenditure of available potential
energy (H) due to ow in the channel. Fitting the data of versus C
V
,
an approximate linear relationship can be drawn for the quasi-static
runs (=50 C
V
14; R
2
=0.90) and the following power function
result for the dynamic tests (Fig. 13; R
2
=0.99):
= 12 + 1600C
11:3
V
11
Bathurst et al. (1997) assumed H/L=tan =0.20 (=11.3).
Similarly in Eq. (11), for C
V
=0.50, the H/L ratio is equal to 0.22
(=12.6), but increasing the volumetric concentration causes the
H/L ratio to rise quickly (i.e. with C
V
=0.60, is 17) and highlights
a strong dependence of L on H and C
V
and a weak dependence on the
released sediment volume (Table 4).
Eq. (11) was applied to predict travel distances surveyed in the
eld (Table 3). We assumed that C
V
=0.60 and 0.65, corresponding to
the highest sediment concentrations tested in the dynamic runs and
near the back-calculated eld values (c
e max
, Table 2). The best
prediction (Fig. 14) comes from using C
V
=0.65; the errors are
comparable to those gotten by applying Eq. (7) (Zimmermann et al.,
1997), which proved to be the more accurate empirical equation.
Fig. 8. (a) Tilting-plane rheometer: set-up for quasi-static tests. (b) Detail of the horizontal plane with articial roughness (thickness 2 mm).
Fig. 9. Rheometer with ume: set-up for dynamic tests.
7 V. D'Agostino et al. / Geomorphology xxx (2009) xxxxxx
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Please cite this article as: D'Agostino, V., et al., Field and laboratory investigations of runout distances of debris ows in the Dolomites
(Eastern Italian Alps), Geomorphology (2009), doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.06.032
6. Discussion
We rst comment about the magnitude of the Fiames debris ows,
i.e. the volumes deposited during the event. The unit magnitudes of
the debris ows that occurred in Fiames on July 5th, 2006, computed
as the ratio of total discharged volume to the drainage area upstream
of the fan apex (Table 2), range from 60,000 to 300,000 m
3
/km
2
.
These values, compared to the extensive analysis carried out in the
Eastern Italian Alps by Marchi and D'Agostino (2004) on historical data
of debris-owvolumes (upper envelope: V/A
c
=70,000 m
3
/km
2
), shed
light on the low frequencies (b1/100 year
1
) of the events in the six
basins of Fiames (Italy).
It is difcult to reconstruct ood hydrographs in ungauged basins,
especially for oods caused by intense and spatially limited rainstorms.
Thus, possible uncertainties in the hydrological analysis, which was
carried out as a preliminary step in assessing debris-owgraphs, deserve
some attention.
The homogeneous characteristics of the basins, dominated by
dolomite outcrops, make it possible for us to state that only minor
errors affect the choice of CN and time of concentration. Larger
uncertainties could be associated with rainfall amounts: convective
rainstorms have strong spatial gradients, and in mountainous areas,
wind may also have a non-negligible inuence on rainfall amounts.
The large magnitude of the debris ows under study, stressed at the
beginning of this section, could indicate that they were caused by
rainfall higher than that recorded at the rain gauge used in rainfall-
runoff modelling. However, the assessment of debris-ow graphs by
means of Eq. (10) produced a realistic balance of water and sediment
volumes, with sediment concentration at the peak (0.630.72;
Table 2), which agrees with the topographic conditions of deposition
surveyed in the fans and replicated by means of the tilting plane
(C
v
=0.650.67). Finally, the resulting back-calculated peak dis-
charges match those from the equation of Mizuyama et al. (1992)
for muddy debris ows (Table 2), which are comparable to debris
ows from dolomite rocks (Moscariello et al., 2002). These circum-
stances all corroborate the robustness of our hydrological approach for
back-calculating the debris-ows ood evolution, when sediment
availability is unlimited (Fig. 4) and the triggering rainfalls have large
return periods, as in the Fiames case study. Our analysis of deposition
areas and runout distances overlapped various approaches, ranging
from empirical methods to those requiring kinematic characteristics
of the ow.
The power relationship between ooded area and deposited volume
(Eq. 1) has two constants, one of which (the d exponent) is proved to be
scale-invariant whenis set equal to 2/3(Iversonet al., 1998; Crosta et al.,
2003). Following this assumption, the remaining coefcient (k)
becomes a surrogate for debris-ow mobility. The Fiames debris-ows
derive fromcarbonate colluviumwith anabundant presence of granular
material (mainlysmall boulders andcoarsegravel) ina silty-sandmatrix
(Fig. 11). The best-t k value of 14.2 for the Fiames debris ows is higher
than the value obtained for the debris ows of Valtellina (Lombardy,
northern Italy), studied by Crosta et al. (2003) (k=6.2), but it is much
lower than the value calibrated by Berti and Simoni (2007) for debris
ows in various parts of the Italian Alps (k=33). A high value of this
coefcient (k=32.5) was also obtained for rapid debris-earth ows in
the volcaniclastic cover near Sarno (southern Italy) (Crosta et al., 2003).
The Valtellina data have a dominant lithology comprised of
dolostone (Val Alpisella), phyllites and paragneiss (Campo Nappe, Val
Zebr). If we rearrange the best-t equation obtained by Crosta et al.
(2003) for the two subsamples (forcing the exponent d to 2/3), we
obtaink=5.3 for phyllites andk=8.8 for dolomites. We couldtherefore
conclude that an average value of k of about 10 would be applicable for
debris ows fed by dolomite rocks. This value of k is lowand quite close
to that obtained for debris ows rich in ne material derived from
metamorphic rocks in Valtellina: the calibration of k supports the
cohesive behaviour of debris ows from dolomite colluvium. This
nding agrees with the classication of dolomite debris ows as
cohesive sediment gravity ows proposed by Moscariello et al. (2002)
on the basis of sedimentological observations.
The failure of limiting topographic methods (Ikeya, 1989; Burton and
Bathurst, 1998) and the occurrence of deposition on fan slopes greater
than 16 conrm that high basal shear stresses developed during the
Fiames event. Debris-ow deceleration was likely enhanced by water
draining from the mixture during its movement. As it is typical in the
Dolomites, the Fiames alluvial fans are arid and dominated by loose,
coarse debris. Actually, ne material is abundant in fresh deposits, but is
Fig. 10. (a) Detail of the ume bottom with articial roughness (thickness 2 mm). (b) Upstream view of the articial ume.
Fig. 11. Grain size distribution of debris-ow material used in the laboratory tests.
8 V. D'Agostino et al. / Geomorphology xxx (2009) xxxxxx
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Please cite this article as: D'Agostino, V., et al., Field and laboratory investigations of runout distances of debris ows in the Dolomites
(Eastern Italian Alps), Geomorphology (2009), doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.06.032
soon winnowed away from the surface layer by overland ow. As a
consequence, subsequent debris-owrunout occurs on very permeable
surfaces that favour water inltration.
The assessment of Eq. (9) based on the momentum conservation
conrms the ndings of Okuda and Suwa (1984) and Rickenmann
(2005) that the frictional energy slope S
f
is very close to the slope S
d
of
alluvial fans generated from debris ows. The maximum calibrated
ratio between the two slopes (coefcient f =1.072) is close to that
proposed by Rickenmann (2005) (f =1.08) and is lower than the value
(f =1.12) obtained by Okuda and Suwa (1984). The case study would
therefore suggest that, in alpine debris ows, an assumption of f =1.07
to 1.08 is reasonable for a cautionary assessment of travel distances.
The applications of empirical formulas for runout and travel distance
indicate that they remain a useful tool for creating a preliminary hazard
map. Eq. (8) implicitly contains the distance under prediction as an
independent variable (H, on the right side of the equation, is a function
of L). The performance of Eq. (8) for the Fiames debris ows is inuenced
by known H values, but a non-convergent topographic solution can be
reached for steep alluvial fans. Considering the remaining empirical
formulas, Eq. (5) generally overpredicts R, whereas Eqs. (4) and (6) give
less conservative results, but the underestimates of R do not exceed 33%
and 23%, respectively (Fig. 6). The acceptable performance of the Ikeya
(1989) equation (Table 1; Eq. 4) is noteworthy, considering that it was
developed for Japan, i.e. under different geomorphological, geological and
climatic condition (Fig. 6). Eq. (7) was proposed by Zimmermann et al.
(1997) as a lower envelope of the H/L ratio. In this research, the equation
best predicts the observed travel distances (Figs. 7 and 14) and is a further
conrmation of the previous remarks on the highly dissipative behaviour
of debris ow originating in drainage basins with dolomite lithology.
The H/L ratio, which corresponds to a resistance coefcient, was one
of theearliest dimensionless variables used(Heim, 1882) whenstudying
the potential travel distance of gravitational phenomena (rock andsnow
avalanche, earthow, landslides). The inverse of the H/L ratio (L/H=1/
tan) is the net travel efciencyand expresses energy dissipations both
inside (frictional, turbulent and viscous) and outside the ow. The latter
are causedby the topography and the roughness of the surface onwhich
debris ows propagate, as well as by the presence of obstacles (houses,
levees, woods, etc.). Several researchers (Corominas, 1996; Iverson,
1997) suggest a range of L/H from 2 to 20 and a decreasing trend with
the logarithm of deposited volume. According to Japanese eld
Table 4
Data from the laboratory tests (L=H/tan ). Debris ow of run No.1 stopped in the channel (H reported for this run is the difference in elevation between point t of Fig. 12 and the
end of the deposit in the channel).
Test N R (m) B
max
(m) A (m
2
) L
F
(m) M
T
(kg) H (m) () () C
V

eq
(g cm
3
)
Dynamic runs 1 1.23 11.080 0.580 15 24.49 0.65 2.015
2 0.580 0.350 0.176 1.80 10.615 0.728 15 16.85 0.60 1.930
3 1.140 0.425 0.405 1.80 10.150 0.728 15 13.80 0.55 1.845
4 1.180 0.610 0.596 1.80 9.763 0.728 15 13.62 0.50 1.775
5 1.350 0.880 0.800 1.80 9.375 0.728 15 12.92 0.45 1.705
6 1.150 0.435 0.416 1.35 10.150 0.611 15 13.54 0.55 1.845
7 1.060 0.615 0.515 0.90 10.150 0.495 15 13.80 0.55 1.845
8 1.410 0.670 0.769 1.35 9.375 0.611 15 12.32 0.45 1.705
9 1.300 0.950 0.831 0.90 9.375 0.495 15 12.38 0.45 1.705
Quasi-static runs 10 0.450 0.525 0.207 0.00 9.153 0.211 0 19.38 0.67 2.034
11 0.760 0.770 0.531 0.00 9.623 0.235 0 14.45 0.60 1.925
12 0.890 0.955 0.685 0.00 10.136 0.258 0 13.93 0.55 1.843
13 0.750 0.710 0.423 0.00 5.325 0.141 0 8.89 0.50 1.775
14 0.810 0.830 0.524 0.00 5.093 0.141 0 8.34 0.45 1.698
15 0.490 0.475 0.197 0.00 8.684 0.213 5 18.93 0.67 1.930
16 0.745 0.745 0.475 0.00 9.660 0.232 5 14.86 0.60 1.932
17 0.960 0.980 0.680 0.00 10.135 0.257 5 13.30 0.55 1.843
18 0.680 0.770 0.456 0.00 5.325 0.147 5 10.16 0.50 1.775
19 0.780 0.840 0.541 0.00 5.093 0.147 5 9.07 0.45 1.698
20 0.490 0.560 0.234 0.00 9.170 0.220 10 20.03 0.67 2.038
21 0.760 0.795 0.466 0.00 9.667 0.238 10 15.28 0.60 1.933
22 0.935 1.005 0.705 0.00 10.138 0.262 10 14.15 0.55 1.843
23 0.700 0.770 0.462 0.00 5.325 0.151 10 10.38 0.50 1.775
24 0.800 0.840 0.567 0.00 5.093 0.151 10 9.28 0.45 1.698
25 0.500 0.610 0.269 0.00 9.139 0.224 15 20.65 0.67 2.031
26 0.710 0.825 0.436 0.00 9.664 0.242 15 16.80 0.60 1.933
27 0.960 0.950 0.686 0.00 10.112 0.262 15 14.07 0.55 1.839
28 0.750 0.780 0.464 0.00 5.325 0.155 15 10.16 0.50 1.775
29 0.780 0.870 0.591 0.00 5.093 0.155 15 9.83 0.45 1.698
Fig. 12. Schematic diagram of tilting-plane rheometer with the geometric parameters
involved in the laboratory data analysis.
Fig. 13. Relationship between the angle of the frictional energy line () and the volumetric
concentration (C
V
).
9 V. D'Agostino et al. / Geomorphology xxx (2009) xxxxxx
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Please cite this article as: D'Agostino, V., et al., Field and laboratory investigations of runout distances of debris ows in the Dolomites
(Eastern Italian Alps), Geomorphology (2009), doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.06.032
observations, Bathurst et al. (1997) suggests a value of L/H=5 for debris
ows. Inthe 71cases reportedby Corominas (1996), L/Hvaries from1.3to
15. The studies by Toyos et al. (2007) on the Sarno event, dealing with
volumes of 10
4
10
5
m
3
, report a range of L/Hfrom2.4to4.2, (mean=3.1).
Iverson(1997), for 10 m
3
of poorlysortedsandgravel debris-owmixture,
obtained values close to 2.
Our eld data (Table 3) range between 2 and 3 (mean=2.6) and
show increasing values in the volume range 210
3
110
4
m
3
, while
for the largest magnitude (4.710
4
m
3
), L/H remains close to 3. The
laboratory experiments on a sub-sample of the Fiames debris ow
(static and dynamic tests; C
V
varies between 0.45 and 0.67) stress a
higher travel efciency (Fig. 13), between 2.2 and 6.8 (mean=4.3).
The efciency decreases (L/H=2.24.2; mean of 3.5) when consider-
ing the volumetric concentration C
V
N0.5, but still tends to be larger
than eld data (mean laboratory value 3.5 against 2.6).
Iverson (1997) showed that: a) scale is of paramount importance in
experimental studies of debris ows, and b) small-scale models do not
satisfactorilyreplicatethenatural process. Inparticular, twoscalingfactors
must be takeninto consideration(IversonandDenlinger, 2001; Denlinger
and Iverson 2001): a non-Newtonian Reynolds number and a number
expressingtheinuenceontheowmotionof the porepressure diffusion
normal to the owdirection. The rigorous study by Iverson and Denlinger
(2001) shows that viscous effects are less important and pore pressure is
preserved much longer in ows at larger scales. The rapid dissipation of
pore pressure could then increase the resistance to motion in small-scale
models.
In our laboratory tests, the measured higher mobility with respect to
the eld scale seems to depict a different behaviour from that expected
on the basis of the aforementioned physical conditions. The lower
energy dissipation inthe model is likely to be ascribed to the incomplete
range of debris sizes, and to the lowroughness of the channel (Fig. 10a)
and deposition plane (Fig. 8b), which does not represent the
topographic irregularities of the alluvial fan and the presence of
vegetation.
Model experiments make it possible to analyse the inuence of the
volumetric concentration on R. In fact, C
V
strongly controls R, almost
regardless of the mass of the sediment (Fig. 13; Table 4). The dynamic
tests also reect the fraction of the initial potential energy dissipated
along the channel due to the distance travelled in the ume (L
f
; Table 4).
A quasi-static formation of the fan caused by a dam-break at its apex
corresponds to lower angle compared to the alluvial fan formation
controlled by an entering channel (Fig. 13). The application of Eq. (11)
withthe more competent C
V
value (0.65) inthe eldts the Fiames data
well (Fig. 14) andgives anaccuracy (meanunderestimationaround13%)
comparable to Eq. (7), which was derived fromSwiss eld data. The use
in Eq. (11) of a lower C
V
(0.6) overestimates L on average by 30% and
gives a large response of L to a small variation in C
v
, when C
v
is close to
maximumvalues for debris ows. The tight dependence of L on C
v
could
be surrogated by the link of L with the catchment area (A
c
) (Eq. 7), as A
c
,
froma morpho-hydrological point of view, is directly proportional tothe
runoff volume and inversely proportional to C
v
. In this context, further
research is necessary to better dene whether and under which
conditions laboratory results on fan formation and runout distance are
comparable to corresponding eld features.
7. Conclusions
The runout distance and total travel distance were investigated for
six debris ows triggered by the same rainstorm in contiguous
catchments of the Dolomites. Basin areas (from 0.02 to 0.1 km
2
) and
debris-owvolumes (from210
3
from510
4
m
3
) vary by one order of
magnitude and offered the possibility of comparing several methods for
assessing the terminal displacement of the debris-ow sediments. The
approach adopted in this study coupled eld observations with
laboratory tests on material collected from debris-ow deposits.
The applicationof elddata to the relationshipbetweenoodedarea
on the alluvial fan and debris-ow volume made it possible for us to
calculate a value of the coefcient k in Eq. (1) for debris ows generated
frombasins withdolomite lithology, intopography typical of thestudied
area.
The application of empirical methods for predicting the runout
distance on fans and total travel distance of eld data enabled us to
identifyequations suitablefor assessingthesevariables for debris ows on
scree slopes and alluvial fans of the studied region. Both the calibration of
the volume balance relationship and the application of empirical
equations outline low mobility of viscous silt-rich debris ows of the
Dolomites.
Experiments carried out on sediment samples collected from
debris-ow deposits allowed us to analyse the relationships between
variables that control the distances attained by debris-ow mixtures.
Although scale issues cause major problems in small-scale laboratory
studies of debris ows, integrating laboratory tests with eld
documentation of debris ows proved promising for studying these
hazardous phenomena.
Acknowledgments
We thank Marco Cavalli for collaborating in the eld surveys. LiDAR
data have been arranged by C.I.R.GEO (Interdepartmental Research
Center for Cartography, Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and G.I.S.),
University of Padova. The research was supported by: MURST ex 60%
Italian Government funds, years 20072008, Prof. Vincenzo D'Agostino;
PRIN-2007 project: Rete nazionale di bacini sperimentali per la difesa
idrogeologica dell'ambiente collinare e montano, Prof. Sergio Fattorelli.
The comments of Paul Santi and an anonymous reviewer helped
improve the manuscript.
References
Arattano, M., Marchi, L., 2008. Systems and sensors for debris-ow monitoring and
warning. Sensors 8, 24362452.
Aron, G., Miller, A.C., Lakatos, D.F., 1977. Inltration formula based on SCS curve
numbers. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Division, ASCE 103 (4), 419427.
Bathurst, J.C., Burton, A., Ward, T.J., 1997. Debris ow run-out and landslide sediment
delivery model tests. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 123, 410419.
Berti, M., Simoni, A., 2007. Prediction of debris ow inundation areas using empirical
mobility relationships. Geomorphology 90, 144161.
Burton, A., Bathurst, J.C., 1998. Physically based modelling of shallowlandslide sediment
yield at a catchment scale. Environmental Geology 35, 8999.
Cannon, S.H., 1989. Anapproachfor estimatingdebris owrunout distances. Proc. Conference
XX International Erosion Control Association, Vancouver, Canada, pp. 457468.
Chow, V.T., Maidment, D.R., Mays, L.W., 1988. Applied hydrology. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Corominas, J., 1996. The angle of reach as a mobility index for small and large landslides.
Canadian Geotechical Journal 33, 260271.
Fig. 14. Comparison of travel distances observed in the eld with those calculated by
means of Eqs. (11) and (7) for the six studied debris ows.
10 V. D'Agostino et al. / Geomorphology xxx (2009) xxxxxx
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Please cite this article as: D'Agostino, V., et al., Field and laboratory investigations of runout distances of debris ows in the Dolomites
(Eastern Italian Alps), Geomorphology (2009), doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.06.032
Crosta, G.B., Cucchiaro, S., Frattini, P., 2003. Validation of semi-empirical relationships
for the denition of debris-ow behaviour in granular materials. In: Rickenmann,
D., Chen, C. (Eds.), Proc. 3rd International Conference on Debris Flows Hazards
Mitigation: Mechanics, Prediction and Assessment, Davos, Switzerland. Millpress,
Rotterdam, pp. 821831.
D'Agostino, V., Marchi, L., 2003. Geomorphological estimation of debris-ow volumes in
alpine basins. In: Rickenmann, D., Chen, C. (Eds.), Proc. 3 rd International Conference
on Debris Flows Hazards Mitigation: Mechanics, Prediction and Assessment, Davos,
Switzerland. Millpress, Rotterdam, pp. 10971106.
Deganutti, A.M., Tecca, P.R., Genevois, R., Galgaro, A., 2003. Field and laboratory study on
the deposition features of a debris ow. In: Rickenmann, D., Chen, C. (Eds.), Proc.
3rd International Conference on Debris Flows Hazards Mitigation: Mechanics,
Prediction and Assessment, Davos, Switzerland. Millpress, Rotterdam, pp. 833841.
Denlinger, R.P., Iverson, R.M., 2001. Flow of variably uidized granular masses across
three-dimensional terrain2. Numerical prediction and experimental tests. Journal
of Geophysical Research 106, 553566.
Fannin, R.J., Wise, M.P., 2001. An empiricalstatistical model for debris ow travel
distance. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 38, 982994.
Genevois, R., Tecca, P.R., Berti, M., Simoni, A., 2000. Debris-ow in the Dolomites:
experimental data from a monitoring system. In: Wieczorek, G., Naeser, N. (Eds.),
Proc. 2nd International Conference on Debris-ow Hazards Mitigation: Mechanics,
Prediction, and Assessment, Taipei. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 283291.
Ghilardi, P., Natale, L., Savi, F., 2003. Experimental investigation and mathematical simulation
of debris-ow runout distance and deposition area. In: Rickenmann, D., Chen, C. (Eds.),
Proc. 3 rd International Conference on Debris Flows Hazards Mitigation: Mechanics,
Prediction and Assessment, Davos, Switzerland. Millpress, Rotterdam, pp. 601610.
Gregoretti, C., 2000. Estimation of the maximum velocity of a surge of a debris ow
propagating along an open channel. Proc. Int. Symp. Interpraevent 2000, Villach-
Oesterreich, Band 3, pp. 99108.
Gregoretti, C., Dalla Fontana, G., 2008. The triggering of debris ow due to channel-bed
failure in some alpine headwater basin of the Dolomites: analysis of critical runoff.
Hydrological Processes 22, 22482263.
Heim, A., 1882. Der Bergsturz von Elm. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Geologischen
Gesellschaft 34, 74115 (In German).
Hungr, O., 1995. A model for the runout analysis of rapid ow slides, debris ows and
avalanches. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 32, 610623.
Hungr, O., Morgan, G.C., Kellerhalls, R., 1984. Quantitative analysis of debris torrent hazards
for design of remedial measures. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 21, 663677.
Hrlimann, M., Rickenmann, D., Graf, C., 2003. Field and monitoring data of debris-ow
events in the Swiss Alps. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 40 (1), 161175.
Ikeya, H., 1989. Debris ow and its countermeasures in Japan. Bulletin International
Association of Engineering Geologists 40, 1533.
Iverson, R.M., 1997. The physics of debris ows. Reviews of Geophysics 35, 245296.
Iverson, R.M., Denlinger, R.P., 2001. Flowof variably uidizedgranular masses across three-
dimensional terrain1. Coulomb mixture theory. Journal of Geophysical Research106,
537552.
Iverson, R.M., Schilling, S.P., Vallance, J.W., 1998. Objective delineation of lahar-hazard zones
downstream fromvolcanoes. Geological Society of American Bulletin 110, 972984.
Laigle, D., Hector, A.F., Hbl, J., Rickenmann, D., 2003. Comparison of numerical simulations of
muddydebris owspreadingtorecords of real events. In: Rickenmann, D., Chen, C. (Eds.),
Proc. 3rd International Conference on Debris Flows Hazards Mitigation: Mechanics,
Prediction and Assessment, Davos, Switzerland. Millpress, Rotterdam, pp. 635646.
Liu, X., 1996. Size of a debris ow deposition: model experiment approach.
Environmental Geology 28, 7077.
Major, J.J., 1997. Depositional processes in large-scale debris-ow experiments. Journal
of Geology 105, 345366.
Marchi, L., D'Agostino, V., 2004. Estimation of the debris-ow magnitude in the Eastern
Italian Alps. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 29, 207220.
McDougall, S.D., Hungr, O., 2003. Objectives for the development of an integrated three-
dimensional continuummodel for the analysis of landslide runout. In: Rickenmann,
D., Chen, C. (Eds.), Proc. 3rd International Conference on Debris Flows Hazards
Mitigation: Mechanics, Prediction and Assessment. Davos, Switzerland. Millpress,
Rotterdam, pp. 481490.
Mizuyama, T., Uehara, S., 1983. Experimental study of the depositional process of debris
ow. Japanese Geomorphological Union 4, 4963.
Mizuyama, T., Kobashi, S., Ou, G., 1992. Prediction of debris ow peak discharge. Proc.
Int. Symp. Interpraevent, Bern, Switzerland, Band 4, pp. 99108.
Moscariello, A., Marchi, L., Maraga, F., Mortara, G., 2002. Alluvial fans in the Italian Alps:
sedimentary facies and processes. In: Martini, P., Baker, V.R., Garzon, G. (Eds.), Flood
& Megaood Processes and DepositsRecent and Ancient Examples. Blackwell
Science, Oxford (UK), pp. 141166.
O'Brien, J.S., Julien, P.Y., Fullerton, W.T., 1993. Two-dimensional water ood and
mudow simulation. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 119, 244261.
Okuda, S., Suwa, H., 1984. Some relationships between debris ow motion and
microtopography for the Kamikamihori fan, North Japan Alps. In: Burt, T.P., Walling,
D.E. (Eds.), Catchment Experiments in Fluvial Geomorphology. GeoBooks, Norwich,
pp. 447464.
Okuda, S., Suwa, H., Okunishi, K., Yokoyama, K., Nakano, M., 1980. Observations onthe motion
of a debris ow and its geomorphological effects. Zeitschrift fr Geomorphologie N.F.,
Supplementband 35, 142163.
Rickenmann, D., 1999. Empirical relationships for debris ows. Natural Hazards 19,
4777.
Rickenmann, D., 2005. Runout prediction methods. In: Jakob, M., Hungr, O. (Eds.),
Debris-Flow Hazards and Related Phenomena. Praxis, Chichester, pp. 305324.
Rickenmann, D., Zimmermann, M., 1993. The 1987 debris ow in Switzerland:
documentation and analysis. Geomorphology 8, 175189.
Soil Conservation Service (SCS), 1956, 1964, 1969, 1971, 1972, 1985, 1993. Hydrology. National
EngineeringHandbook, Supplement A, Section4, Chapter 10, SCS-USDA, Washington, DC.
Takahashi, T., 1978. Mechanical characteristics of debris ow. Journal of the Hydraulic
Division 104, 11531169.
Takahashi, T., 1991. Debris ow. IAHR Monograph Series. Balkema Publishers,
The Netherlands.
Toyos, G., Oramas Dorta, D., Oppenheimer, C., Pareschi, M.T., Sulpizio, R., Zanchetta, G.,
2007. GIS-assisted modelling for debris owhazard assessment based on the events
of May 1998 in the area of Sarno, Southern Italy: Part I. Maximum run-out. Earth
Surface Processes and Landforms 32, 14911502.
Vandre, B.C., 1985. In: Bowles, D.S. (Ed.), Ruud Creek debris ow. Delineation of
landslide, ash ood and debris ow hazards. General Series Report. Utah State
University, Logan (Utah, pp. 117131.
Van Steijn, H., Coutard, J.P., 1989. Laboratory experiments with small debris ows:
physical properties related to sedimentary characteristics. Earth Surface Processes
and Landforms 14, 587596.
Viparelli, C., 1963. Ricostruzione dell'idrogramma di piena. L'Energia Elettrica 6,
421428. (In Italian).
Zimmermann, M., Mani, P., Gamma, P., Gsteiger, P., Heiniger, O., Hunziker, G., 1997.
Murganggefahr und Klimanderung-ein GIS-basierter Ansatz. Schlussbericht
NFP31, ETH, Zurich. (In German).
Glossary
A ooded area (m
2
) (eld and laboratory)
A
C
catchment area (km
2
)
B maximum lateral width of deposit (m)
B
c
mean width of the channel upstream of deposition initiation
B
max
maximum lateral dispersion of deposit in the laboratory
c

in situ volumetric concentration of bed sediments before the ood

c
e
debris-ow sediment concentration at equilibrium conditions
C dimensionless Chzy coefcient
C
V
solid concentration by volume, C
V
=V
S
/(V
S
+V
L
), where V
S
is the solid
volume and V
L
is the water volume)
d empirical coefcient in Eq. (1)
f empirical coefcient
g gravitational acceleration (9.81 ms
2
)
h mean thickness of the deposit (m)
h
u
entry ow depth (m)
H potential mass energy and total drop (m) (eld and laboratory)
H elevation difference between the initiation point and the point where
deposition starts (m)
k empirical coefcient in Eq. (1)
L total travel distance (m)
L
C
channel length (m)
L
F
distance travelled in the ume by the debris-ow mixture (m)
M
T
total mass of sediment in laboratory tests (kg)
N number of the test
Q
d
debris ow discharge (m
3
s
1
)
Q
w
liquid discharge (m
3
s
1
)
R runout distance (m) (eld and laboratory)
S
f
friction slope (m/m)
S
d
fan slope (m/m); S
d
=tan
d
t upstream point of the mass
u
u
entry velocity (m s
1
)
V debris-ow volume (m
3
)
inclination of the tilting-plane ()
mean angle of the frictional energy line () (eld and laboratory)

d
terrain slope angle along the deposition, angle of the fan slope ()

u
angle of the channel upstream of deposition initiation ()

eq
bulk density of the debris ow in laboratory tests (g cm
3
)
empirical coefcient in Eq. (2)
11 V. D'Agostino et al. / Geomorphology xxx (2009) xxxxxx
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Please cite this article as: D'Agostino, V., et al., Field and laboratory investigations of runout distances of debris ows in the Dolomites
(Eastern Italian Alps), Geomorphology (2009), doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.06.032