Next Article in Journal
Estimating the Leaf Water Status and Grain Yield of Wheat under Different Irrigation Regimes Using Optimized Two- and Three-Band Hyperspectral Indices and Multivariate Regression Models
Previous Article in Journal
Comparison between Deep Learning and Tree-Based Machine Learning Approaches for Landslide Susceptibility Mapping
Previous Article in Special Issue
Forecasting of Debris Flow Using Machine Learning-Based Adjusted Rainfall Information and RAMMS Model
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Modelling Debris Flow Runout: A Case Study on the Mesilau Watershed, Kundasang, Sabah

1
Razak Faculty of Technology and Informatics, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Kuala Lumpur 54100, Malaysia
2
Disaster Preparedness and Prevention Centre (DPPC), Malaysia-Japan International Institute of Technology (MJIIT), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Kuala Lumpur 54100, Malaysia
3
Department of Civil, Environmental and Applied Systems Engineering, Kansai University, Osaka 564-8680, Japan
4
Faculty of Engineering, Tottori University, Tottori 680-8552, Japan
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Water 2021, 13(19), 2667; https://doi.org/10.3390/w13192667
Submission received: 24 August 2021 / Revised: 16 September 2021 / Accepted: 23 September 2021 / Published: 27 September 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Debris Flows Research: Hazard and Risk Assessments)

Abstract

Debris flows are among the fatal geological hazards in Malaysia, with 23 incidents recorded in the last two decades. To date, very few studies have been carried out to understand the debris flow processes, causes, and runouts nationwide. This study simulated the debris flow at the Mesilau watershed of Kundasang Sabah caused by the prolonged rainfall after the 2015 Ranau earthquake. Several interrelated processing platforms, such as ArcGIS, HEC-HMS, and HyperKANAKO, were used to extract the parameters, model the debris flow, and perform a sensitivity analysis to achieve the best-fit debris flow runout. The debris flow travelled at least 18.6 km to the Liwagu Dam. The best-fit runout suggested that the average velocity was 12.5 m/s and the lead time to arrive at the Mesilau village was 4.5 min. This high debris flow velocity was probably due to the high-water content from the watershed baseflow with a discharge rate of 563.8 m3/s. The flow depth and depositional thickness were both lower than 5.0 m. This study could provide crucial inputs for designing an early warning system, improving risk communication, and strengthening the local disaster risk reduction and resilience strategy in a tectonically active area in Malaysia.
Keywords: ArcHydro and HEC-GeoHMS; debris-flow hazard; debris flow-modelling; HEC-HMS; HyperKANAKO; Ranau earthquake ArcHydro and HEC-GeoHMS; debris-flow hazard; debris flow-modelling; HEC-HMS; HyperKANAKO; Ranau earthquake

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Rosli, M.I.; Che Ros, F.; Razak, K.A.; Ambran, S.; Kamaruddin, S.A.; Nor Anuar, A.; Marto, A.; Tobita, T.; Ono, Y. Modelling Debris Flow Runout: A Case Study on the Mesilau Watershed, Kundasang, Sabah. Water 2021, 13, 2667. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13192667

AMA Style

Rosli MI, Che Ros F, Razak KA, Ambran S, Kamaruddin SA, Nor Anuar A, Marto A, Tobita T, Ono Y. Modelling Debris Flow Runout: A Case Study on the Mesilau Watershed, Kundasang, Sabah. Water. 2021; 13(19):2667. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13192667

Chicago/Turabian Style

Rosli, Muhammad Iylia, Faizah Che Ros, Khamarrul Azahari Razak, Sumiaty Ambran, Samira Albati Kamaruddin, Aznah Nor Anuar, Aminaton Marto, Tetsuo Tobita, and Yusuke Ono. 2021. "Modelling Debris Flow Runout: A Case Study on the Mesilau Watershed, Kundasang, Sabah" Water 13, no. 19: 2667. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13192667

APA Style

Rosli, M. I., Che Ros, F., Razak, K. A., Ambran, S., Kamaruddin, S. A., Nor Anuar, A., Marto, A., Tobita, T., & Ono, Y. (2021). Modelling Debris Flow Runout: A Case Study on the Mesilau Watershed, Kundasang, Sabah. Water, 13(19), 2667. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13192667

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop