Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:13
DOI 10.1007/s12665-016-6332-8
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Investigation and dynamic analysis of the long runout catastrophic
landslide at the Shenzhen landfill on December 20, 2015,
in Guangdong, China
Yang Gao1,2 • Yueping Yin3 • Bin Li1 • Wenpei Wang3 • Nan Zhang3
Chunxu Yang4 • Xiao Zuo4
Received: 27 May 2016 / Accepted: 8 December 2016
Ó Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016
Abstract At 11:40 a.m., December 20, 2015, a catas-
trophic landslide occurred in Shenzhen, Guangdong,
Southeast China. Seventy-seven people were killed, and 33
buildings were buried or damaged, which were in the direct
path of the landslide at the Guangming New District. The
landslide involved 2.73 million m3 of the municipal solid
waste (MSW) and had a horizontal runout distance of
1100 m, over a vertical distance of 113 m, which was
equivalent to a Fahrböschung of 6°, and covered an area of
0.38 km2. Basic post-failure characteristics are described in
this study. Dynamic simulation software (DANW) and
rheological models were used to simulate the runout
behavior of the displaced landslide material, in order to
provide information for the hazard zonation of similar
types of potential MSW landslides. The simulated results
revealed that a combination of the frictional model and
Voellmy model is able to provide the best performance in
simulating this landslide. Also, the results showed that this
landslide had a duration of about 50 s, with a maximum
velocity of 22.4 m/s. It was expected that these models and
parameters could improve the accuracy of future hazard
assessments of areas with geological, topographical, and
climatic features similar to the Shenzhen Hong’ao landfill.
& Bin Li
libin1102@foxmail.com
1
Institute of Geo-Mechanics, Chinese Academy of
Geo-Sciences, CGS, Beijing, China
2
China University of Geosciences, Beijing, China
3
China Institute of Geo-Environment Monitoring, CGS,
Beijing, China
4
Beijing University of Technology, Beijing, China
•
Keywords MSW  Long runout  Dynamic analysis 
DANW model
Introduction
Environment protection and sustainable development are
important problems faced by humans in the twenty-first
century. This is even more important in solid waste man-
agement design and landfill slopes safety where deposition
of municipal solid waste (MSW) must be achieved in a way
that minimizes its environmental and human life impact.
There are several documented failures of MSW dumps and
landfills throughout the world, causing loss of life, envi-
ronmental degradation, and high cost of repair (Koerner
and Soong 2000; Eid et al. 2000; Blight 2008; Reddy et al.
2009; Reddy and MunwarBasha 2014). So it is very
important to study the stability and mitigation measure of
landfill landslide. Most experts have previously focused on
the large number analysis of landfill slope stability (Reddy
et al. 1996; Blight 2004; Chen et al. 2008; Koerner et al.
2008; Babu et al. 2010; Lavigne et al. 2014), while little
attention has been paid to the analysis of the runout
dynamic feature. Some landslides with long runout
behaviors are further destructive, because they cannot be
prevented and mitigated with usual civil engineering
measures. They tend to cause serious loss of human life, as
well as extreme damages to man-made structures and
facilities. At the present time, early prediction and pre-
vention measures are effective ways to mitigate the risks of
long runout landslides (Hutchinson 1977; Sassa
1988; Crosta and Agliardi 2003; Denlinger and Iverson
2004; Yin et al. 2009, 2016a; Yin and Xing 2012; Xing
et al. 2014; Nocentini et al. 2015). Numerical simulations
were widely used as efficient tools in the analysis of
123
13 Page 2 of 16
landslide post-failure in landfills. Many numerical studies
have been performed in order to obtain a better under-
standing of landslide behavior, which the mass movement
and accumulation process is simulated using the some
analysis methods, for example discrete element method,
SPH method, MPS method, DDA method, LS-RAPID
method and DAN method (McDougall and Hungr
2004, 2005; Zhou 2013; Huang et al. 2013; Huang and Zhu
2014; Zhang et al. 2015; Sassa et al. 2010, 2012; Yin et al.
2016a). These reliable approaches have been proposed for
predicting the motion of landslide masses (Chen and Lee
2003; Poisel et al. 2008; Xing et al. 2016a).
At 11:40 a.m., on December 20, 2015, a catastrophic
landslide occurred in Shenzhen, Guangdong, Southeast
China. Seventy-seven people were killed, and 33 buildings
which were directly in the path of the landslide were buried
or damaged. The landslide involved 2.73 million m3 of the
municipal solid waste (MSW) from source area and had a
horizontal runout distance of 1100 m, over a vertical dis-
tance of 113 m, which was equivalent to a Fahrböschung of
6°, and covered an area of 0.38 km2 (Fig. 1). In accordance
with the Fahrböschung of 6°, the Shenzhen Hong’ao
landfill landslide belonged to the category of the long
runout landslide (Zhang et al. 2010). In this study, the
Fig. 1 Remote-sensing image of the Shenzhen landfill landslide: a image showing the landfill slope on December 18, 2015. b image showing the
landslide on December 21, 2015
123
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:13
runout behavior of this landslide was analyzed using the
DANW simulation which was developed by Hungr (1995).
This study introduced the post-failure behavior of
Shenzhen Hong’ao landfill landslide on the basis of
detailed field investigation and a companion paper by Yin
et al. (2016b). Subsequently, the runout behavior of this
landslide was revealed using DANW numerical technol-
ogy, and some disaster reasons were discussed in the end. It
is expected that these models and parameters will help
clarify the propagation process of this landslide and
improve the accuracy of future hazard assessments of areas
with geological, topographical, and climatic features sim-
ilar to the Shenzhen Hong’ao landfill.
Waste management operation activities
in the Hong’ao landfill site
The discharge of municipal solid wastes (MSW) has
shown a gradual growing tendency with the rapid growth
of China’s economy since the 1990s. The annual total
discharge of municipal solid wastes is about 1550 million
to 2400 million tons, which accounts for 40% of the total
waste, and the account still continues to increase.
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:13
Therefore, many large cities have successively built
municipal solid waste (MSW) landfill in order to cope
with this serious problem in China. The discharge of
MSW has increased obviously when the construction of
the urban railway system in Shenzhen city since 2008. In
accordance with the statistics of the city management
department, the total annual discharge of MSW was
9.5–18 million m3. The majority of MSW was accumu-
lated in landfill, while a small portion was used for
reclamation projects. The Hong’ao landfill was one of the
main landfill sites.
The Hong’ao landfill is located in Guangming New
District, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China. The geographical
position located at latitude 22° 420 4600 N and longitude 113°
560 0600 E. It is located 51 km north of Hong Kong, 84 km
west of Guangzhou City, and 21 km from downtown
Shenzhen (Fig. 2).
In this study, the evolution process of the Shenzhen
landfill landslide was mainly divided into three stages: the
quarrying stage (Fig. 3a), landfilling stage (Fig. 3b), and
the landslide stage (Fig. 3c). The research area was a
granite quarrying site before December, 2013. The com-
mencement of construction of the landfill was started from
December, 2013, and according to the design plan, it
intends to close in December, 2017. The landfill has a
planned maximum filling elevation of 95 m, average ele-
vation of 51 m, and total storage capacity of 4 million m3
(Urban Construction Plan for Shenzhen City). In
Fig. 2 Location of the
December 20, 2015, landslide at
the MSW landfill site in
Guangming New District,
Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
Page 3 of 16 13
accordance with the field investigation and multistage
remote-sensing images, out of ten terraces, terraces T0–T6
had been compacted, shaped, and afforested, and terraces
T7, T8, and T9 were being filled and compacted with a
preliminary shape (Fig. 1). The MSW landfill had placed
5.83 million m3 before sliding, which exceeded the design
value by 1.83 million m3. The MSW placement involved
overburden and was done too fast, and accelerate the
failure of landfill slope.
Through the check of management log, the Hong’ao
landfill slope displayed a ground subsidence phenomenon
in the edge region on October 21, 2015. Also, the terraces
of slopes T3 and T4 displayed cracks on November 26,
2015. At 06:00 am on December 20, 2015, it was found
that the cracks occurred between the terraces of slopes T3
and T4. Meanwhile, the rear of landfill displayed cracks
with width of 40 cm, and lengths about 50 m. At 11:28:29
a.m., December 20, 2015, the landfill slope experienced an
overall failure.
Geological and climatic setting
The Hong’ao landfill is surrounded on three sides (east,
west, and south) by mountain, and narrowed down at the
north, which form a closed pattern. The highest point in the
study area was located in the southwest of the landfill, with
an elevation of 190 m. The lowest point was located in the
123
13 Page 4 of 16 Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:13

Fig. 3 3D effect images of the

multi-stages of the municipal
solid waste and the landslide at
the Shenzhen landfill site

valley plain area in the north, with an elevation of 34.4 m
(Figs. 1, 5).
The exposed bedrock of this site is composed of
strongly, moderately, and slightly weathered granite, which
develops into three prominent and distinctive planes with
altitudes of 15°–25°\75°–84°, 265°–270°\48°–58°, and
210°–225°\40°–85°, respectively. The main body of this
landfill slope is composed of MSW from urban construc-
tion and was mainly handled method by an artificial filling
(Fig. 6). Seismic intensity grade is VII in this study area,
and seismic conditions were not present when the landslide
occurred.

123
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:13
The groundwater recharge was mainly from precipita-
tion. The multi-year annual average precipitation in the
study area was 1605.3 mm, and the average evaporation
was 1107 mm. The wet season occurred from April to
September each year. In accordance with the analysis of
the precipitation station data of the nearby landslide site,
the maximum daily precipitation (147.2 mm) occurred on
May 11, 2014, in the last three years, while the maximum
annual precipitation (1943.7 mm) is in 2013. We find that
the cumulative precipitation from November 20, 2015, to
December 20, 2015, was just 95.7 mm. There was no
precipitation observed during the five days before the
landslide (Fig. 4).
Through the above investigation and data analysis, it
was believed that precipitation and earthquakes were not
direct triggering factors.
Post-failure behavior and the detailed description
of the long runout
Following the landfill slope failure, the landslide’s main
body about 2.73 million m3 was sheared failure at a high-
level position. The main body moved downstream along
N20°W direction in fluidization flow style and dispersed to
the open area north of the landfill site. The total area of the
landslide was up to 0.38 km2, with a north–south axis
length of about 1100 m, a maximum east–west width of
630 m, and a minimum width of 150 m (Fig. 5). The main
body of landslide buried and impacted the industrial zone
and destroyed 33 buildings. In accordance with the accu-
mulation characteristics, the landslide-affected area was
mainly divided into the landslide source, propagation, and
accumulation areas (Figs. 5, 6). Figure 7 shows the field
situation of the different spatial locations after accumula-
tion (the locations of the pictures are marked in Figs. 5, 6).
Figure 7a shows the exposed granite bedrock at crown of
the landslide, which was the main quarrying target of the
stone pit. There was no displacement phenomenon
Fig. 4 Daily and cumulative
rainfall near Shenzhen Hong’ao
landfill landslide area
Page 5 of 16 13
observed after sliding. Figure 7b shows undisplaced MSW
in the landslide source area. MSW was the main compo-
nent of the landfill slope, and a large volume of material
moved away from the source area. Figure 7c shows the
accumulation characteristics at the toe of rupture surface
and the propagation area. The main body material moved
downstream during the propagation area and dispersed
toward the accumulation area. Figure 7d shows the front of
the accumulation area where the destroyed buildings are
visible. The buildings were buried and destroyed in the
industrial zone, due to the huge impact energy of the
landslide motion.
Source area
The landslide source area was located in the Hong’ao
landfill, Guangming New District. The crown of slope and
the toe of the rupture surface were 156 and 64 m in ele-
vation, respectively. The source area had a length of 460 m
along the main slide direction (section I–I0 ); a width of
150–400 m; and an area of 0.15 km2 (Figs. 5, 8a).
According to borehole data, the maximum thickness of the
landfill slope before sliding was 95 m, and the average
thickness was 66 m. The sliding mass consisted of MSW
with a maximum thickness of 50 m, and the average
thickness was about 35 m (landslide main body). The
residual accumulation thickness of main body was about
15 m in source area. The main scarp had a width of 350 m
along the direction of S245°W, and a slope angle of about
55°. The eastern lateral scarp had a strike of 333°, and a dip
angle of 40° (Fig. 8b). The western lateral scarp had a
strike of 346°, and a dip angle of 50° (Fig. 8c). The surface
of the rupture had an angle of 4° (Fig. 6).
The tests in situ and boreholes showed that this type of
MSW was mainly composed of weathered soil of stratum
such as granite, migmatite, and sandstone (Fig. 8d) and
construction materials (Fig. 8e). Basic physical and
mechanical parameters were tested in the laboratory. The
weathered soil mainly contains 30% gravel grain larger
123
13 Page 6 of 16 Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:13

Fig. 5 Zoning map of the landslide at the Shenzhen landfill: topographical contour map showing the source area, propagation area, accumulation
area, and destroyed houses at the front of the landslide

Fig. 6 Longitudinal profile of the landslide at the Shenzhen landfill (see Fig. 5 for the profile location). The profile shows the topography before
and after the landslide’s instability, as well as the rock–soil contact surface

than 20 mm, 30% sand grain ranging in size from 0.05 to
2 mm, and 40% silt grain smaller than 0.05 mm in diam-
eter (Fig. 9). The natural density of the weathered soil
sample was 1.65–1.75 g/cm3, and cohesive c = 10 kPa
with internal friction angle, ui = 17° by undrained direct
shear test, and saturation degree of 90.4–94.5%. The
above-mentioned physical and mechanical parameters
reflected the high saturation degree and low shear strength
of the MSW, which were critical reasons that can cause
landslide failure in very gentle surface of rupture.
Propagation area
The propagation area was located at the toe of rupture
surface of the Hong’ao landfill slope. This area has a length
of 100 m along the main slide direction (section I–I0 ),
width of 150–260 m, and area of 0.02 km2 (Fig. 5). The
propagation area shows valley terrain, and it is the main
channel which landslide moved from source area to accu-
mulation area. The main body of landslide flowed through
the propagation area in fluidization style. The terraces of
slopes T1 and T0 were the rear of propagation area with
elevation of 64 m, and the front of propagation area with
elevation of 47 m, respectively. The height difference
about 17 m before sliding (Fig. 6). Artificial slope and
landscape recovering projects were implemented in the
propagation area before sliding. Figure 10a, b showed the
photos of the toe of the surface rupture before and after
sliding at propagation area, respectively, and we can take
the buildings in the northeast as the fiduciary object. Fig-
ure 10c shows the state of the toe of the surface rupture
after landslide failure and downstream sliding. Figure 10d
shows the dynamic erosion trace on the west side which
occurred during the sliding motion.

123
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:13
Fig. 7 Accumulation and disaster characteristics at different loca-
tions following the landslide instability destruction of the Shenzhen
Hong’ao landfill: a stable mountain at the rear margin of the
landslide. b Landslide source area and residual undisplaced material.
Accumulation area
The accumulation area was located in an industrial zone.
The accumulation area has a length of 540 m along the
main slide direction (section I–I0 ), a maximum width of
620 m, and an area of 0.21 km2 (Fig. 5). The maximum
thickness of the landfill accumulation body was 22 m, and
the average thickness was 10 m. There are a lot of build-
ings in the accumulation area, and the toe of the surface
rupture had a distance of about 150 m from the temporary
buildings (730 m location on the profile), and about 240 m
from the nearest plant (820 m location on the profile;
Fig. 6). The exit of the landslide had a horizontal distance
of about 740 m from metro line 6, and about 180 m from
the West-East natural gas transmission pipeline (Fig. 5). A
large number of houses were destroyed and buried during
the landslide. Also, pipelines were broken, and the land-
slide caused the injuries or deaths of numerous people
(Fig. 11).
In this study, the accumulation areas were divided into
two subzones according to the damage type after accu-
mulation (Fig. 11a). It included a buried subzone and an
impacted subzone. The damage type of the buried subzone
was mainly based on the burial of temporary buildings
north of propagation area, with an average thickness of
Page 7 of 16 13
c Location of the landslide the toe of rupture surface and propagation
area, and d front margin of the landslide accumulation area and
destroyed houses. (the locations of the pictures were marked in Fig. 5)
15 m. This subzone was characterized by a large kinetic
energy and high destruction degree (Fig. 11b). The
impacted subzone was mainly based on the impact of the
industrial plants, with an average thickness of 6 m. This
subzone was not completely buried, and the residual
buildings after the landslide accumulation were visible
(Fig. 11c).
Dynamic analysis
DANW is an MS Windows-based program used to
model the post-failure motion of landslides. It has the
ability to simulate a rapid flow landslide such as shallow
flow and debris flow, and estimate the dynamic behavior
of a landslide. The program has been used to analyze
landslides which have already occurred and can also be
used to predict the impacts of potential landslides
(Hungr 1995). In this paper, we used a continuum
dynamic model DANW developed by Hungr (1995) and
Hungr and McDougall (2009) to simulate the runout
behavior of the Shenzhen Hong’ao landfill landslide and
provide parameters specific to the same type of land-
slides to be used in predictive modeling of potential
landslides.
123
13 Page 8 of 16
Fig. 8 Source area photos of the Shenzhen landslide: a Full-view
photos of the landslide source area on December 21, 2015. b Spring
water site of the landslide source area. c East margin of the landslide
Fig. 9 Grain size distribution of the sample taken from the landslide
123
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:13
source area. d Weathered soil in the landslide source area, and
e exposed demolition and construction materials at the rear margin of
the landslide. (the locations of the pictures were marked in Fig. 5)
Dynamic model
Dynamic back analysis can be empirical, using historical
data such as those of the volume, fall height and runout,
and/or numerical modeling to analyze the runout behavior
of the rock avalanche (Hungr et al. 2005). In accordance
with a two-dimensional of Section I–I0 (Fig. 6), the simu-
lation model was established in the DANW. Variable path
widths were imposed according to the aerial view of the
landslide. Figure 12 shows the morphology profile before
sliding and after accumulation for Shenzhen Hong’ao
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:13
Fig. 10 Toe of the surface rupture and propagation area photos of the
landfill slope: a State of the T0–T3 of the front margin prior to the
slope’s instability. b State of the front margin after the slope’s
landfill landslide. The dynamic model is governed by
internal and basal rheological relationships. The rheologies
which were found to most accurately represent the recor-
ded events were the frictional and Voellmy rheologies
(Boultbee 2005; Xing et al. 2015).
The frictional model usually controls the initial motion
of the flow slides, as could be expected given the granular
character of both the rock avalanche material and most of
the foundation debris (Hungr et al. 2002). The frictional
equation was expressed as follows:
s ¼ rð1  ru Þ tan u ð1Þ
where s is the frictional rheology assuming the resisting
shear force; the pore pressure ratio, ru, and the dynamic
friction angle, u, were the rheological parameters intro-
duced in the model; the pore pressure ratio was derived
from the pore pressure, u, normalized by the total bed
normal stress at the base, r.
Voellmy rheology pertains to a velocity-dependent
friction and is able to simulate energy loss of turbulent
flows. It is presumably caused by a greater proportion of
fully liquefied material, including loose soil overridden in
the flow path, mobilized by rapid loading, and entrained by
the flow slide. The Voellmy rheology describes total
Page 9 of 16 13
instability. c State after the instability and destruction, and d lateral
boundary of the landslide propagation area. (the locations of the
pictures were marked in Fig. 5)
resistance as a sum of a frictional term and a turbulent
term:
m2
s ¼ rf þ c ð2Þ
n
The frictional term relates the shear stress to the normal
stress through a friction coefficient, f, which is analogous to
tan u. The turbulent term summarizes all velocity-depen-
dent factors of flow resistance and is expressed by the
square of the velocity and the density of the debris through
a turbulence coefficient, n.
Model selection
We can select the most suitable combined models to sim-
ulate through comparing with the actual situation. We
followed the order of the landslide flowing through the
region, and choiced some combined models. The different
rheology model was selected in the different area for the
Shenzhen landfill landslide. Frictional rheology can be
suitable for simulation of open hillside failures where tur-
bulent flow has not been developed and landslide mass has
a good integrity. On the other hand, Voellmy rheology is
considered suitable for simulation of channelised debris
123
13 Page 10 of 16
Fig. 11 3D stereoscopic aerial images and photos after sliding on
December 21, 2015: a UAV full-view aerial image of the landslide.
b Photos of the burial site below the toe of the surface rupture, which
flows where landslide debris is mixed with surface water as
well as debris flows in topographical depressions (GEO
2011, 2012, 2013).
As a result, the frictional model could be used at the
source, and Voellmy model could be used at propagation
and accumulation areas to achieve the best fit with the
observed runout distance for the actual situation of
123
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:13
led to rescue difficulties due to the large burial thickness, and c impact
zone where the buildings were destroyed and pulled down. (the
locations of the pictures were marked in Fig. 5)
Shenzhen landfill flow like slide (Fig. 12). Because the
sliding mass of this landslide had a good integrity and
slower speed in the source area, it was preferable to select
the frictional model. Based on the analysis of ring shear
test by Yin et al. (2016b), the relationship between the
shear rate and the shear resistance is positive correlation.
Figure 13 shows shear resistance is proportional to the
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:13
Fig. 12 Results of the DANW
analyses using frictional-
Voellmy combined model and
parameters: The red dotted line
shows the topography before the
landslide failure; the black solid
line shows the accumulation
topography after sliding; the
blue solid line shows path width
shear rate under 200, 400, and 600 kPa of the axial com-
pression, respectively, and velocity-dependent factors of
flow resistance are obvious. Therefore, Voellmy model is
more reasonable in the propagation area and accumulation
area. Detailed test parameters can refer to Yin et al.
(2016b).
Input parameters
The rheological parameters were determined by trial and error
to achieve the best-fit values, considering also published of
real case studies (Hungr and Evans 1996; McDougall and
Hungr 2004; Sosio et al. 2008; Yin et al. 2016a; Xing et al.
2016b). The pore pressure ratio (ru) is adopted as a range of
0.5–0.8, and a dynamic friction angle is adopted as a range of
10°–30°. The Voellmy model with a friction coefficient of
0.05–0.1 and a turbulence coefficient of 200–500 m/s2 pro-
duces a reasonable simulation of this flow for the events
which were investigated. These parameters are in the range of
properties used earlier in the simulation of long runout flow
slides involving coal mine waste (Hungr et al. 2002). Firstly,
based on the above results, the frictional model was selected
to simulate the failure behavior of the landslide source. In
order to simulate the frictional loss along the sliding surface,
we examined excess pore water pressure increasing acting on
the surface of rupture. Internal friction angle controls the
longitudinal stress in the flowing landslide mass. This paper
selects a typical strength testing index of internal friction
angle ui = 17° and density c = 15 kN/m3. Subsequently,
Voellmy rheology was selected to simulate the runout
behavior of the landslide in propagation area and accumula-
tion area.
The simulation parameters can be used for forward
predictions or used the experiment test in the back analysis
of the DANW. Internal friction angle controls the longi-
tudinal stress in the flowing landslide mass (Savage and
Hutter 1989). Based on the results of the laboratory tests,
the internal friction angle was set to ui = 17°, and the bulk
friction angle was observed to umin = 14.5° (Yin et al.
2016b). A sensitivity analysis was performed to examine
Page 11 of 16 13
the value of bulk friction angle u and the pore pressure
coefficient ru in DANW. The best result of the simulation
could be observed at a bulk basal friction angle of 15°–
15.5° (Fig. 14). Then, the bulk friction angle of the sample
was most suitable set to u = 15.3°. The ru is the ratio of
pore pressure to total normal stress at the base of a
boundary block. Due to high saturation degree of landslide
mass and surface of rupture being in a liquefaction state
(Yin et al. 2016b), ru = 0.8 could better respond to the
actual state of landslide motion in source area. We inputted
f = 0.1 in propagation and accumulation areas by same
mean. As shown in Table 1, the parameters and models
were able to duplicate the actual runout behavior of this
landslide. The slide started as a flow of frictional material,
and the transition to Voellmy material was made at a dis-
tance of 580 m, where the surface material was residual
deposition soil. The frictional parameters for this case had
been selected by trial and error as u = 15.3° and ru = 0.8.
The Voellmy parameters for this case have been selected
by trial and error as f = 0.1 and n = 400 m/s2.
Results and discussion
Motion velocity
The results of the DAN are seen in Figs. 15 and 16.
Figure 15 shows the plot of velocity versus path dis-
tance at different time steps of the simulation. It can be
seen that the duration of the movement is estimated at
50 s for an average velocity of 20 m/s, and it was
consistent with description of the scene witnesses.
Figure 16 shows the maximum front velocity (22.4 m/s)
occurred at a path distance of 810 m. We setup two
observation points in simulation (Fig. 17). They were
noted, respectively, that the DAN simulation obtained
velocity and thickness information at the temporary
buildings of point A (730 m) and at the residential
buildings of point B (820 m). Point A has an velocity
increase trend at front little phase and indicated that
123
13 Page 12 of 16 Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:13

Fig. 13 Shear resistance

against shear rate for displaced
material of Shenzhen ‘‘12.20’’
landslide

velocity of the sliding mass still increased, which the which the maximum velocity was 22 m/s. In the accu-
maximum velocity was 20 m/s. However, the velocity mulation area, the sliding mass buried a large number
of point B always showed a downward trend, and it of buildings in the industrial zone, then the velocity
indicated that the sliding mass slows down gradually, gradually decreased to zero (Fig. 5).

123
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:13 Page 13 of 16 13

Fig. 14 Plot of the runout distance versus the basal friction angle of
the source frictional model Fig. 15 Plot of the runout distance versus the velocity during the
motion (intervals of 5 s)
Kinetic energy

In accordance with the basic principle of energy conser-

vation, kinetic and potential energy will be constantly
converted to each other during the motion. The kinetic
energy is mainly counted by the thickness and velocity of
the landslide. Fig. 16 Plot of the runout distance versus the velocity of the front
1 and tail during the motion
E ¼ mv2 ð3Þ
2
where the kinetic energy E of landslide is determined by
the velocity v and mass m (it can be calculated by the
accumulation thickness, width, and the density) and will
change with the time and distance of motion.
Figure 18 reflects the change of the kinetic energy during
the landslide motion. The results showed that the maximum
kinetic energy of the landslide obtained in the simulation was
1.89 9 106 kJ at a path distance of 540 m. The motion
velocity of the landslide at this position was about 20 m/s,
while the landslide thickness was about 34 m. The DAN
simulation obtained kinetic energy of 1.2 9 106 kJ at the
temporary buildings of point A (730 m), and 1.7 9 106 kJ at
the residential buildings of point B (820 m). Meanwhile, it
can be noted from Fig. 18 that the exit position of source area
has larger kinetic energy than other location. When sliding
mass flowed to the propagation area, the path width changed Fig. 17 Time versus velocity of observation point A and B
gradually narrow, and the kinetic energy of the sliding mass
has a downward tendency. thickness along the path can be seen in the figure. The final
distribution of the debris given by the simulation showed
Accumulation thickness that the maximum debris thickness obtained in the simu-
lation was 28 m at a path distance of 700 m, which was in
Figure 19 shows the landslide profiles at different time good agreement with the data estimated from the field
steps of the simulation. The plot of the average deposit investigation. Figure 20 is noted that the DAN simulation

Table 1 Back calculated

Zone Rheology c (N/m3) ui (°) Ru f u (°) n (m/s2)
values of the rheology
parameters and models Source area Frictional 15 17 0.8 – 15.3 –
Propagation area and accumulation area Voellmy 15 17 – 0.1 – 400

123
13 Page 14 of 16 Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:13

Fig. 18 Plot of the kinetic

energy versus the path distance
during the motion (intervals of
5 s)

results showed that the runout distance was about 1100 m

Fig. 19 Landslide profiles at different time steps of the simulation
(intervals of 5 s)
(Fig. 19).
Based on the DANW model, a large number of case
studies of rapid flow slides in North America and China
have been analyzed. Many of the case studies of long
runout landslides have been analyzed based on the
matching of models and parameters through trial and error,
and valuable database of calibrated parameters has been
created (Hungr et al. 2005; Xing et al. 2016a). The afore-
mentioned simulation better restored the motion status of
the landslide, analyzed the dynamic behavior of the
Shenzhen Hong’ao landfill landslide, and obtained some
valuable reference data. The approaches used in this
landslide study will enable predictions of the runout of
potential landslides which are similar to the MSW land-
slide. This method may be adopted firstly for landfill slopes
in some urban of China.

Conclusions

On December 20, 2015, a catastrophic landslide occurred

in Shenzhen, Guangdong, Southeast China. In this study,
the geological setting and causes of the disaster based on
the field investigation were introduced, and the runout
behavior was analyzed using a DANW simulation. Some of
the conclusions reached were as follows:
1. This study introduced the MSW management opera-
tion activities of the Shenzhen Hong’ao landfill
landslide (quarrying stage—landfilling stage—land-
Fig. 20 Accumulation thickness versus time about observation point slide) and discussed the post-failure behavior.
A and B
2. A DANW model was used to simulate the runout
process, and the results showed that a combined FV
obtained accumulation thickness of 24 m at the temporary
(frictional-Voellmy) model and parameters provided
buildings of point A (730 m), and accumulation thickness
the best performance in simulating this landslide. We
of 20 m at the residential buildings of point B (820 m) at
analyzed dynamical properties of velocity, kinetic
the end. Due to the gentle surface of rupture, a part of the
energy, deposition thickness in runout trajectory in
sliding mass accumulated in the source area. The simulated

123
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:13
response to the forces of gravity and dissipation of
Shenzhen Hong’ao landfill flow slide, and that it
brought about serious damage to buildings.
3. The total duration of the Shenzhen landfill landslide
was estimated to be 50 s, with a maximum velocity of
22.4 m/s, and maximum thickness of 28 m. Very good
agreement between the observed and simulated results
was achieved. These results suggested that this model,
with the parameters obtained through back analyses,
could potentially be a strong tool for the prediction of
similar types of MSW landslide hazards.
Acknowledgements The authors express their gratitude to Professors
Wang Sijing, Xing Aiguo, Feng zhen, and Xu yongqiang, as well as
Dr. Wang lei, He kai. Thank you for your kind support and guidance.
We are grateful to Prof. O. Hungr for supplying a copy of the DANW
software.
References
Babu GLS, Reddy KR, Srivastava A et al (2010) Reliability analysis
of municipal solid waste landfill slopes. In: Proceedings of 6th
international congress on environmental geotechnics
Blight GE (2004) A flow failure in a municipal solid waste landfill—
the failure at Bulbul, South Africa. In: AW Skempton memorial
conference, p 12
Blight GE (2008) Slope failures in municipal solid waste dumps and
landfills: a review. Waste Manage Res 26(5):448–463
Boultbee N (2005) Characterization of the Zymoetz river rock
avalanche. M.Sc. thesis, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby
Chen H, Lee CF (2003) A dynamic model for rainfall-induced
landslides on natural slopes. Geomorphology 51(4):269–288
Chen YM, Gao D, Zhu B et al (2008) Seismic stability and permanent
displacement of landfill along liners. Sci China Ser E Technol
Sci 51(4):407–423
Crosta GB, Agliardi F (2003) Failure forecast for large rock slides by
surface displacement measurements. Can Geotech J
40(1):176–191
Denlinger RP, Iverson RM (2004) Granular avalanches across
irregular three-dimensional terrain: 1. Theory and computation.
J Geophys Res Earth Surf 109(F1):1–14
Eid HT, Stark TD, Evans WD et al (2000) Municipal solid waste
slope failure. I: waste and foundation soil properties. J Geotechn
Geoenviron Eng 126(5):397–407
GEO (2011) Guidelines on the assessment of debris mobility for
channelised debris flows. GEO technical guidance note No. 29.
Geotechnical Engineering Office, Civil Engineering and Devel-
opment Department, The Government of the Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region
GEO (2012) Guidelines on assessment of debris mobility for open
hillslope failures. GEO technical guidance note No. 34.
Geotechnical Engineering Office, Civil Engineering and Devel-
opment Department, The Government of the Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region
GEO (2013) Guidelines on the assessment of debris mobility for
failures within topographic depression catchments. GEO techni-
cal guidance note No. 38. Geotechnical Engineering Office, Civil
Engineering and Development Department, The Government of
the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
Page 15 of 16 13
Huang Y, Zhu CQ (2014) Simulation of flow slides in municipal solid
waste dumps using a modified MPS method. Nat Hazards
74:491–508
Huang Y, Dai ZL et al (2013) SPH-based numerical simulations of
flow slides in municipal solid waste landfills. Waste Manage Res
31(3):256–264
Hungr O (1995) A model for the runout analysis of rapid flow slides,
debris flows, and avalanches. Can Geotech 32(4):610–623
Hungr O, Evans SG (1996) Rock avalanche runout prediction using a
dynamic model. In: Proceedings of the 7th international
symposium on landslides, vol. 17, Trondheim, p 21
Hungr O, McDougall S (2009) Two numerical models for landslide
dynamic analysis. Comput Geosci 35(5):978–992
Hungr O, Dawson RF, Kent A et al (2002) Rapid flow slides of coal-
mine waste in British Columbia, Canada. Rev Eng Geol
15:191–208
Hungr O, Corominas J, Eberhardt E (2005) State of the art paper
#4, estimating landslide motion mechanism, travel distance and
velocity. Landslide risk management. Proceedings, Vancouver
conference. Taylor and Francis Group, London, pp 99–128
Hutchinson JN (1977) Assessment of the effectiveness of corrective
measures in relation to geological conditions and types of slope
movement. Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol 16:131–155
Koerner RM, Soong TY (2000) Stability assessment of ten large
landfill failures. Geotech Spec Publ 103:1–38
Koerner RM, Koerner GR, Eith AW et al (2008) Geomembrane
temperature monitoring at dry and wet landfills. In: Proceedings
of the global waste management symposium, Copper Mountain,
Colo, vol. 7410
Lavigne F, Wassmer P, Gomez C et al (2014) The 21 February 2005,
catastrophic waste avalanche at Leuwigajah dumpsite, Bandung,
Indonesia. Geoenviron Disasters 1(1):1–12
McDougall S, Hungr O (2004) A model for the analysis of rapid
landslide motion across three-dimensional terrain. Can Geotech J
41(6):1084–1097
McDougall S, Hungr O (2005) Dynamic modelling of entrainment in
rapid landslides. Can Geotech J 42(5):1437–1448
Nocentini M, Tofani V, Gigli G et al (2015) Modeling debris flows in
volcanic terrains for hazard mapping: the case study of Ischia
Island (Italy). Landslides 12:831
Poisel R, Preh A, Hungr O (2008) Run out of landslides-continuum
mechanics versus discontinuum mechanics models. Geomech
Tunn 1(5):358–366
Reddy KR, MunwarBasha B (2014) Slope stability of waste dumps
and landfills: state-of-the-art and future challenges. In: Proceed-
ings of Indian geotechnical conference IGC-2014 December
18–20, 2014, Kakinada, India, pp 2311–2337
Reddy KR, Kosgi S, Motan ES (1996) Interface shear behavior of
landfill composite liner systems: a finite element analysis.
Geosynth Int 3(2):247–275
Reddy KR, Hettiarachchi H, Parakalla NS et al (2009) Geotechnical
properties of fresh municipal solid waste at Orchard Hills
Landfill, USA. Waste Manag 29(2):952–959
Sassa K (1988) Geotechnical model for the motion of landslides. In:
Proceedings of 5th international symposium on landslides,
BLandslides, Balkema, Rotterdam, vol. 1, pp 37–56
Sassa K, Nagai O, Solidum R et al (2010) An integrated model
simulating the initiation and motion of earthquake and rain
induced rapid landslides and its application to the 2006 Leyte
landslide. Landslides 7(3):219–236
Sassa K, He B, Miyagi T et al (2012) A hypothesis of the Senoumi
submarine megaslide in Suruga Bay in Japan—based on the
undrained dynamic-loading ring shear tests and computer
simulation. Landslides 9(4):439–455
Savage SB, Hutter K (1989) The motion of a finite mass of granular
material down a rough incline. J Fluid Mech 199:177–215
123
13 Page 16 of 16
Sosio R, Crosta GB, Hungr O (2008) Complete dynamic modeling
calibration for the Thurwieser rock avalanche (Italian Central
Alps). Eng Geol 100(1–2):11–26
Xing AG, Wang GH, Li B et al (2014) Long-runout mechanism and
landsliding behaviour of large catastrophic landslide triggered by
heavy rainfall in Guanling, Guizhou, China. Can Geotech J
52(7):971–981
Xing AG, Xu Q, Gan JJ (2015) On characteristics and dynamic
analysis of the Niumian valley rock avalanche triggered by the
2008 Wenchuan earthquake, Sichuan, China. Environ Earth Sci
73(7):3387–3401
Xing AG, Wang GH, Yin YP et al (2016a) Investigation and dynamic
analysis of a catastrophic rock avalanche on September 23, 1991,
Zhaotong. China. Landslides 13(5):1035–1047
Xing A, Xu Q, Zhu Y et al (2016b) The August 27, 2014, rock
avalanche and related impulse water waves in Fuquan, Guizhou,
China. Landslides 13(2):411–422
Yin YP, Xing A (2012) Aerodynamic modeling of the Yigong
gigantic rock slide-debris avalanche, Tibet, China. Bull Eng
Geol Environ 71(1):149–160
123
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:13
Yin YP, Wang F, Sun P (2009) Landslide hazards triggered by the
2008 Wenchuan earthquake, Sichuan, China. Landslides
6(2):139–152
Yin YP, Cheng Y, Liang J et al (2016a) Heavy-rainfall-induced
catastrophic rockslide-debris flow at Sanxicun, Dujiangyan, after
the Wenchuan Ms 8.0 earthquake. Landslides 13(1):9–23
Yin YP, Li Bin, Wang Wenpei et al (2016b) Mechanism of the
December 2015 catastrophic landslide at the Shenzhen landfill
and controlling geotechnical risks of urbanization. Engineering
2(2):230–249
Zhang M, Yue-ping YIN, Shu-ren W (2010) Development status and
prospects of studies on kinematics of long runout rock
avalanches. J Eng Geol 18(6):805–817
Zhang YB et al (2015) DDA validation of the mobility of earthquake-
induced landslides. Eng Geol 194:38–51
Zhou JW, Cui P, Yang XG (2013) Dynamic process analysis for the
initiation and movement of the Donghekou landslide-debris flow
triggered by the Wenchuan earthquake. J Asian Earth Sci
76:70–84