224 American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) ISSN (Print) 2313-4410, ISSN (Online) 2313-4402 © Global Society of Scientific Research and Researchers http://asrjetsjournal.org/ The Evaluation of Debris Flows Influence on the Pass through Type Debris Flow against Construction Goga Chakhaiaa*, Eduard Kukhalashvilib, Robert Diakonidzec, Nugzar Kvashilavad, Levan Tsulukidzee, Shorena Kupreishvilif,Tamriko Supatashvilig, Irina Khubulavah a,b,c,d,e,f,g,hTsotne Mirtskhulava Water Management Institute of Georgian Technical University Abstract In the article is presented the pass through type debris flow against construction, builts at the surrounded by the flow principle, has been implemented theoretical researches for evaluation debris flow influence on that. As a result of our implemented calculation, in a condition of specific access, established, a numerical value of current loads on the cylinder form elements at the debris flow impact on the link debris flow. Results of the above calculation provide the basis for considering this construction potentially effectively debris flow against construction. Key words: Construction; debris flow; theoretical calculation. 1. Introduction Recently, as a result of global warming running on the Earth significantly changed climate on the various continents, because frequent heavy rains caused floods, intensified the process of melting glaciers, erosion and debris flows, landslides and debris flows and glacial debris flow processes, as a significant threat to the ecological imbalance in the influence zone of the population, under the risk are safety functionality of strategy importance transport corridor and energetic objects, the country's economy is suffering.To accomplish the formation of the frequency of natural disasters, Georgia is not an exception, In this respect the example of on the basin of the river Kabaki ( the tributary of the river Tergi) the large-scale natural disaster which took place on 17 May 2014. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * Corresponding author. http://asrjetsjournal.org/ American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2016) Volume 20, No 1, pp 224-234 225 Particularly, in the catchment basin of the river Kabaki, as a result of melt glacier Devdoraki, formated debris flow with high 20-25 meter, which locked bed of the river Tergi and dead 7 human, has destroyed military motor-road 500 meters in length, of the strategic importance road connecting Russia-Georgia-Azerbaijan- Armenia, Rendered inoperative 2 pipeline of Russia and Armenia with diameter 200, and 750 through Georgia, leaving a long cut off gas supplies to Armenia. After blocking river Tergi basin by debris flow, under the threat turned out to be lower in elevation under construction Darial HPP hydraulic structures [1, 2]. Also, it is important, that, in the section of formation debris flow arose new vulnerability areas, which may cause the formation of repeated debris flow, what more can do much damage as Georgia and the South Caucasus countries. The above-mentioned circumstances, due to various genesis debris flow activated in debris flow nature river catchment basin in Georgia, there should be implement debris flow against resources saving measures, for minimizing ecological risks [3, 4, 5, 6, 7 , 8, 9, 10]. 2. Materials and methods For this purpose, we have developed, resources saving through type debris flow against construction, built on base of surrounded principle of power [11], which consist checkerboard pattern knotted cylindrical elements, which are metal pipes with the metal axis, fulls of inert mass of riverbed, which have been fitted with tires, they are fixed on Reinforced concrete base(see Figure 1, 2, 3, 4). Among the elements of the scheme of through type debris flow against construction, developed by us:(1)metal pipe, (2) tyres, (3) metal axis, (4) angled bar for connecting metal pipe and metal axis, (5) ropes for fixing on the river bed slope cylindrical elements component of the debris flow against construction, (6) ropes clamps, (7) anchors for attach ropes clips on the river bed slopes, (8) reinforce for attach anchors on the river bed slopes, (9) metal angled bar, for connection cylinder elements of the construction to each other, (10) inert mass placed in the tube, (11) slopes of river bed, (12) the building of reinforced concrete foundation. Figure 1: General view of the through type debris flow against construction American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2016) Volume 20, No 1, pp 224-234 226 Figure 2: Plan of the through type debris flow against construction Figure 3: Front view of the construction (from the tailrace) American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2016) Volume 20, No 1, pp 224-234 227 Figure 4: The view of the construction site For assessment of cohesive debris flow impact on the above noted through type debris flow against construction it is given follow calculation with specific assumptions [12]:Initially, it should be noted, that distance between rows of cylinder elements of our construction L=10 m, because, due to lack of L, in calculation is not provided energy losses in the length of the debris flow during debris flow through from I row to II row of the construction cylinder elements. Deaf building case, when construction creates to bed base 900 corners, debris flow power impact on the construction is equal: Ρ = ω γ ⋅ ⋅ Κ g Q 2 1 , (1) Where, Κ 1 – is experimental coefficient; γ – debris flow volume weight kg/m3 ; g – gravity acceleration (m/s 2); ω – Live sectional area of m2. Due to model of flow motion is received meaning of Κ 1 [5]. 1Κ =1,5             − ⋅ ⋅ +⋅ ϕ ϕϕα cos sin1 2 cos 0 H htg , (2) American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2016) Volume 20, No 1, pp 224-234 228 Where h0 – connectivity equivalent to the height; ϕ – internal friction angle; H – height of debris flow ; α –inclination of bed. Taking into account the above indicates, calculating formula of size of debris flow attacking force on the construction has follow view:             − ⋅ +⋅⋅ ⋅⋅⋅ =Ρ ϕ ϕϕαωγ cos sin1 2 cos5,1 0 2 H htg g v , (3) Meaning of debris flow attacking force on the construction It is the cross-cutting function of capacity. Therefore, in the first place, calculation takes place on the analogical deaf construction, which considering, force of linkage debris flow impact on the construction, when is given characteristics of bed and flow, so when width of debris flow bed B=20m, flow height H=5 m, Flow rate V = 5 (m/s), Volumetric mass of 2000 kg/m 3, Internal friction angle – 300 and inclination of duct 0.2.             − ⋅ +⋅⋅ ⋅⋅⋅ =Ρ ϕ ϕϕαωγ cos sin1 2 cos5,1 0 2 H htg g v = = ( ) 5,5962 866,0 5,01 52 4577,0978,0 81,9 552020005,1 2 =      − ⋅ ⋅ +⋅⋅ ⋅⋅⋅⋅ k.n. Because our suggested construction is though, off road coefficient calculating with formula: ω ωthrough 2 =Κ an Κ 2= ( ) B dn HB HdnB ⋅ −= ⋅ ⋅⋅− 1 ; Where ωthrough–through area between cylinder elements in construction row; n –amount of cylinder elements in construction row, In our case, due to the structures of the construction 3=n . d – diameter of cylinder elements, so ;15,01 20 312 dd −= ⋅ −=Κ ,15,012 d−=Κ wherefore ; 15,0 1 2Κ− =d American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2016) Volume 20, No 1, pp 224-234 229 As for, on the first row of through construction, as attracting force current on the every next row, compare to deaf construction, in case of various assumptions (total 5 access, m=1,…,5), as by percentage, also partially functionality = P mP deaf f ( )2Κ ; I access 2Κ = 0,8; then 20 P P =deaf 1 % 2,0= ; but P1 deaf I row= P 2,0⋅ =5 962,5 ⋅ 0,2=1 192,5 k.n. )3(,1 15,0 8,01 1 = − =d In case of diameter of cylinder shape elements of through type debris flow against construction 1, (3) m, after impact of debris flow at the first row elements o the construction, residual attract force on the second row elements of the construction P1 residual I row is equal: P1 residual I row =P–P1 deaf I row=5 962,5 – 1192,5=4 770 k.n., but P1 deaf II row=P1 residual I row • 0,2 = 4 770 • 0,2 = 954 k.n. after the impact of debris flow at the second-row elements o the construction, residual attract force on the third- row elements of the construction P1residual II row is equal: P1 residual II row = P1 residual I row – P1 deaf II row =4 770 – 954 = 3 816 k.n., but P1 deaf III row= P1 residual II row • 0,2 = 3 816 • 0,2 = 763,2 k.n. Finally will recieve:P1 residualIII row =P1 residualII row – P1 deaf III row =3 816– 763,2= 3 052,8 k.n. From above calculation seem, that in the case of diameter of cylinder shape elements of through type debris flow against construction 1, (3) m, the initial force of the debris flows front P=5 962,5 k.n. impacted on the construction, decreases after through the construction approximately twice (P1 residual III row =3 052,8 k.n.). II access 6,02 =Κ then, American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2016) Volume 20, No 1, pp 224-234 230 40 P P =deaf 2 % 4,0= , but P2 deaf I row= P 4,0⋅ =5 962,5 ⋅ 0,4=2 385 k.n., )6(,2 15,0 4,0 15,0 6,01 2 == − =d In case of diameter of cylinder shape elements of through type debris flow against construction 2,(6) m after impact of debris flow at the first row elements o the construction, residual attract force on the second row elements of the construction P2 residual I row is equal: P2 residualI row =P– P2 deaf I row =5 962,5 – 2 385 =3 577,5 k.n., but P2 deaf II row= P2 residualI row • 0,4 = 3 577,5 • 0,4 =1 431 k.n. after impact of debris flow at the second row elements o the construction, residual attract force on the third row elements of the construction P2 residual II row is equal: P2 residual II row = P2 residualI row– P2 deaf II row =3 577,5–1 431= 2 146,5 k.n., but P2 deaf III row= P2 residualII row • 0,4 = 2 146,5• 0,4 = 858,6 k.n. Finally will recieve:P2 residuaIII row =P2 residuaII row – P2 deaf III row = 2 146,5–858,6=1 287,9 k.n. From above calculation seem, that in case of diameter of cylinder shape elements of through type debris flow against construction 1, (3) m, initial force of the debris flow front P=5 962,5 k.n. impacted on the construction, decreases after through the construction approximately 4,6-times and equal : P2 residual III row =1 287,9 k.n. III access 4,02 =Κ and, 60 P P =deaf 3 % 6,0= , but P3 deaf I row= P 6,0⋅ =5 962,5 ⋅ 0,6=3 577,5 k.n. 0,4 15,0 6,0 15,0 4,01 3 == − =d In case of diameter of cylinder shape elements of through type debris flow against construction 4 m, after impact of debris flow at the first row elements o the construction, residual attract force on the second row elements of American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2016) Volume 20, No 1, pp 224-234 231 the construction P3 residual I row is equal: P3 residualI row =P– P3 deaf I row =5 962,5 – 3 577,5 =2 385 k.n., but P3 deaf II row= P3 residualI row • 0,6 = 2 385 • 0,6 =1 431 k.n. after impact of debris flow at the second row elements o the construction, residual attract force on the third row elements of the construction P3 residual II row is equal: P3 residualII row = P3 residualI row – P3 deaf II row =2 385 –1 431= 954 k.n., but P3 deaf III row= P3 residualII row • 0,6 = 954• 0,6 =572,4 k.n. Finally will receive: P3 residualIII row =P3 residual II row – P3 deaf III row = 954 –572,4=381,6 k.n. From above calculation seem, that in case of diameter of cylinder shape elements of through type debris flow against construction 1, (3) m, initial force of the debris flow front P=5 962,5 k.n. impacted on the construction, decreases after through the construction approximately 15,6-times P3 residual III row =381,6 k.n. IV access 2,02 =Κ and, 80 P P =deaf 4 % 8,0= , but P4 deaf I row= P 8,0⋅ =5 962,5 ⋅ 0,8=4 770 k.n. )3(,5 15,0 8,0 15,0 2,01 4 == − =d In case of diameter of cylinder shape elements of through type debris flow against construction 5 (3) m, after impact of debris flow at the first row elements o the construction, residual attract force on the second row elements of the construction P4 residual I row is equal: P4 residual I row =P– P4 deaf I row =5 962,5 – 4 770 =1 192,5 k.n., but P4 deaf II row= P4 residual I row • 0,8 = 1 192,5 • 0,8 =954 k.n. after impact of debris flow at the second row elements o the construction, residual attract force on the third row elements of the construction P4 residual II row is equal: P4 residual II row = P4 residual I row – P4 deaf II row =1 192,5 –954= 238,5 k.n., American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2016) Volume 20, No 1, pp 224-234 232 but P4 deaf III row= P4 residual II row • 0,8 = 238,5 • 0,8 =190,8 k.n. Finally will receive: P4 residual III row =P4 residual II row – P4 deaf III row =238,5–190,8=47,7 k.n. From above calculation seem, that in case of diameter of cylinder shape elements of through type debris flow against construction 1, (3) m, initial force of the debris flow front P=5 962,5 k.n. impacted on the construction, decreases after through the construction approximately 125 - times P4 residual III row =47,7 k.n. V access 02 =Κ and, 100 P P =deaf 5 % 0,1= , but P5 deaf I row= P )6(,6 15,0 01 5 = − =d 3. Results After through debris flow against construction (third row) connection between residual attacking force and changeable diameter of cylinder shape elements of construction. It is presented follow functional dependence dn=f(Pn residualIIIrow), where amount of assumptions change into 1-5 points (see Figure 5). Figure 5: The functional defendence between changeable diameter of cylinder shape elements and residual attacking force of debris flow after pass through type debris flow against construction American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2016) Volume 20, No 1, pp 224-234 233 After pass through type debris flow against construction, active force on the cylinder element of construction (deaf section), to changeable diameters of cylinder shape of construction is equal: d1=1,(3) in case P1 deaf=P –P1 residualIIIrow =5 962,5– 3 052,8=2 909,7 k.n.; d2=2,(6) in case P2 deaf =P –P2 residualIIIrow =5 962,5– 1 287,9=4 674,6 k.n.; d3=4,0 in case P3 deaf =P –P3 residualIIIrow =5 962,5– 381,6=5 580,9 k.n.; d4=5,(3) in case P4 deaf =P –P4 residualIIIrow =5 962,5–47,7=5 914,8 k.n.; d5=6,(6) in case P5 deaf =P –P5 residualIIIrow=5 962,5– 0=5 962,5 k.n. According of received values draw graph of follow functional dependence dn=f(Pn deaf), where n changes within 1-5 (see Figure 6). Figure 6: The functional defendence between changeable diameter of cylinder shape elements and residual attacking force of debris flow action on the deaf section of the construction after pass through type debris flow against construcion 4. Conclusion Thus, from the report implemented for describe influence of linkage debris flows on the through type debris flow against construction, seen thatconstruction is effective measure for defence to the debris flow, because in condition of fourth access power of debris flow decrease by 125-times, that indicate effectivity of construction and therefore its introduction is perspective. From the calculations implemented for describe influence of linkage debris flow on the through type debris flow against construction seem, that construction is effective American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2016) Volume 20, No 1, pp 224-234 234 engineering measures for a fight against debris flow and its implementation is perspective, because in the condition of these assumptions its reflectivity characteristic is satisfactory and is accepted with taking into account engineering practice. References [1]. Website, last date accessed 5\5\2016, http://www.ambioni.ge/darialis-xeobasi-momxdari-stiqiuri- movlenebi-da-glacialuri-rvarcofebi-myinvarze. [2]. Website, last date accessed 5\5\2016, http://www.epn.ge/archives/20681. [3]. Gavardashvili Givi – The safety measures of mountain landscapes during natural and technogenic disasters. Publishing ,,Iniversal”, Tbilisi, 2011, 237 pages. [4]. Gavardashvili G., Chakhaia G., Tsulukidze L. - Assessment of the stability of debris-flow riverbeds in transport corridor of Georgia. International Scientific Journal “Problems of Applied Mechanics”. # 4(13), Tbilisi, 2003. pp. 43-46. [5]. Gavardashvili G., Tsulukidze L., Chakhaia G. - Engineering-ecological measures for the protection of the transport corridors from Debris-flow. International Scientific Journal “Problems of Applied Mechanics”. # 4(13), Tbilisi, 2003. pp. 65-68. [6]. Chakhaia G. - Prognosis of the debris-flower process for the main tributary of the river Tergi’s gorge. Scientific Articles of the Georgian State Agrarian University. #XXVIII Tbilisi, 2004. pp. 205-207. [7]. Gavardashvili G., Chakhaia G. - The typology and assessment of the basins of the principal mud-flow type Rivers of Georgia. Scientific Articles of the Georgian Hydro ecology Institute. Tbilisi, 2005. pp. 12-19. [8]. Gavardashvili G., Chakhaia G., Tsulukidze L., Kapezina O. - Evaluation and Prediction of the Risk- Factors Post-Mudflow Proce-sses Formed in the Gorge of the River Kabakhi (The Left Tributary of the River Tergi) on May 17, 2014 and Development of Modern Anti-Mudflow Measures. Scientific Proceedings of the Ryazan Agro-technological State University named P.A. Kostychev, №11 -"Modern energy and resource-saving, environmentally sustainable technologies and farming systems", dedicated to the memory of corresponding member of RACXN and NANKR, academician MAEP and RABN I.B. Bochkareva, Ryazan, RUSSIA, 2014, p. 5. [9]. Gavardashvili G., Chakhaia G., Tsulukidze L., Kapezina O. - Evaluation of the environmental safety of small Kazbegi HPP by considering the action of Devdorak glacier formed in the bed of the river Kabakhi (Georgia). Czestochowa University of Technology. Construction of Optimized Energy Potential. 1(15), Czestochowa, Poland, 2015, pp. 55-60. [10]. Chakhaia G. - Calculating of the new construction for debris-flow preventing building. Scientific Articles of the Georgian Hydro ecology Institute. Tbilisi, 2005. pp. 172-176. [11]. Chakhaia G., Tsulukidze L., Varazashvili Z., Diakonidze R., Khubulava I., Supatashvili T., Omsarashvili G. – The evaluation of through type debris flow against construction. The procceding of Wáter Management Institute of Georgian Technical University #68. Tbilisi, 2013, pp. 200-203. [12]. Kukhalashvili E., Omsarashvili G., - The calculation of attacking forcé action on the linckage debris flow transverse construction. Georgian state agrarian university. Vol .3, # 2 (51). Tbilisi, 2010, 70-73 pp. http://www.ambioni.ge/darialis-xeobasi-momxdari-stiqiuri-movlenebi-da-glacialuri-rvarcofebi-myinvarze http://www.ambioni.ge/darialis-xeobasi-momxdari-stiqiuri-movlenebi-da-glacialuri-rvarcofebi-myinvarze http://www.epn.ge/archives/20681