146 citations as recorded by crossref.

1. Impact of Debris Flows on Filter Barriers: Analysis Based on Site Monitoring Data A. Leonardi et al. https://doi.org/10.2113/EEG-D-20-00013
2. A new solver for granular avalanche simulation: Indoor experiment verification and field scale case study X. Wang & J. Li https://doi.org/10.1007/s11433-017-9093-y
3. A non-hydrostatic multi-phase mass flow model S. Pudasaini https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2022.104204
4. faSavageHutterFOAM 1.0: depth-integrated simulation of dense snow avalanches on natural terrain with OpenFOAM M. Rauter et al. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2923-2018
5. Acceleration of Debris Flow Due to Granular Effect T. Yang et al. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2021.660605
6. A Roe-type scheme for two-phase shallow granular flows over variable topography M. Pelanti et al. https://doi.org/10.1051/m2an:2008029
7. The Motion and Deposit Characteristics of Dry Granular Flow Based on Experimental Study R. Sun & Y. He https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-023-00795-4
8. Two-phase approach to modeling the grain-fluid flows with deposition and entrainment over rugged topography H. Wong et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2024.104691
9. Debris flows analysis through quantitative evaluation of soil depth distribution under limited data S. Lee et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2024.108379
10. Predicting Debris Flow Runout with SFLOW Model: Case Study of Datong and Taicun Gullies, Lijiang, China Q. Mehmood et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-024-03020-y
11. A central-upwind scheme for two-phase shallow granular flow model H. Nabwey et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2023.09.079
12. Physically-based modelling of granular flows with Open Source GIS M. Mergili et al. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-12-187-2012
13. The space–time CE/SE method for solving single and two-phase shallow flow models S. Qamar et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compfluid.2014.03.015
14. Dynamics of submarine debris flow and tsunami S. Pudasaini https://doi.org/10.1007/s00707-014-1126-0
15. Optimal systems of Lie subalgebras for a two-phase mass flow S. GhoshHajra et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2016.10.005
16. Granular flows in a rotating drum and on an inclined plane: Analytical and numerical solutions X. Meng et al. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5045308
17. Numerical simulation of mud-flows impacting structures M. Greco et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-018-5279-5
18. Experimental study on rheologic behaviour of debris flow material R. Kaitna et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-007-0026-z
19. A series of two-phase models for grain–fluid flows with dilatancy F. Bouchut et al. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2025.131
20. Shallow Water Hydro-Sediment-Morphodynamic Equations for Fluvial Processes Z. Cao et al. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0001281
21. A generalized quasi two-phase bulk mixture model for mass flow P. Pokhrel et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2017.12.003
22. Hydrodynamic Characteristics of the Formation Processes for Non-Homogeneous Debris-Flow A. Shu et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10040452
23. Coupled Model of Two‐phase Debris Flow, Sediment Transport and Morphological Evolution S. HE et al. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-6724.13031
24. Numerical modelling of the long runout character of 2015 Shenzhen landslide with a general two-phase mass flow model C. Qiao et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-018-1329-z
25. Modeling Shallow Over-Saturated Mixtures on Arbitrary Rigid Topography I. Luca et al. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmech.2012.62
26. A Modular, Model, Library Framework (DebrisLib) for Non-Newtonian Geophysical Flows I. Floyd et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences15070240
27. Numerical modeling of subaerial and submarine landslide-generated tsunami waves—recent advances and future challenges S. Yavari-Ramshe & B. Ataie-Ashtiani https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-016-0734-2
28. An overview of debris-flow mathematical modelling M. Trujillo-Vela et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2022.104135
29. A depth-averaged two-phase model for debris flows over fixed beds J. Li et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsrc.2017.06.003
30. Velocity and runout determination of a debris flow based on energy conservation: the Dongwopu debris flow in Tianjin, China W. Zhang et al. https://doi.org/10.1144/qjegh2014-036
31. Laboratory simulation of slowflows C. Tiwari et al. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0297241
32. A quasi single-phase model for debris flows and its comparison with a two-phase model C. Xia et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-018-4886-5
33. Superelevation analysis of the debris flow curve in Xiedi gully, China Z. Wang et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-020-01999-1
34. Effect of excess pore pressure on the long runout of debris flows over low gradient channels: A case study of the Dongyuege debris flow in Nu River, China Z. Zhou et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2018.01.012
35. Effects of solid fraction of saturated granular flows on overflow and landing mechanisms of rigid barriers C. Ng et al. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.21.00170
36. Modeling of unsaturated granular flows by a two-layer approach X. Meng et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-016-0509-x
37. Two-Dimensional Two-Phase Depth-Integrated Model for Transients over Mobile Bed C. Cristo et al. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0001024
38. Two‐dimensional Dynamics Simulation of Two‐phase Debris Flow W. LIU et al. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-6724.13416
39. Reflection of typhoon morakot — the challenge of compound disaster simulation Y. Chen et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-011-2132-5
40. A depth-averaged SPH-FV landslide dynamic model for evaluating hazard zones Y. Wu & Z. Yang https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2024.106210
41. Agitation and its control on excess pore water pressure and debris‐flow behaviour B. Li et al. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.5687
42. A multi-layer SPH method for generic water–soil dynamic coupling problems. Part I: Revisit, theory, and validation C. Zhu et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2022.115106
43. A model for geotechnical analysis of flow slides and debris flows X. Wang et al. https://doi.org/10.1139/T10-039
44. A quasi-three-dimensional spring-deformable-block model for runout analysis of rapid landslide motion H. Yang et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2014.11.016
45. A dynamic earthflow model S. Pudasaini & M. Mergili https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2025.107959
46. Dynamics, mobility-controlling factors and transport mechanisms of rapid long-runout rock avalanches in China M. Zhang & Y. Yin https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.10.010
47. A depth-averaged debris-flow model that includes the effects of evolving dilatancy. I. Physical basis R. Iverson & D. George https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2013.0819
48. Angle of repose of landslide debris deposits induced by 2008 Sichuan Earthquake J. Wang et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.01.021
49. A two-phase shallow debris flow model with energy balance F. Bouchut et al. https://doi.org/10.1051/m2an/2014026
50. A modified leading-edge runout model incorporating the flow regimes of debris flows X. Gong et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-023-02055-1
51. Landslide-generated tsunami and particle transport in mountain lakes and reservoirs J. Kafle et al. https://doi.org/10.3189/2016AoG71A034
52. Rock and ice avalanche-generated catastrophic debris flow at Chamoli, 7 February 2021: New insights from the geomorphic perspective H. Wang et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2024.109110
53. A two‐phase mechanical model for rock‐ice avalanches S. Pudasaini & M. Krautblatter https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JF003183
54. Rheological evolution of the Mount Meager 2010 debris avalanche, southwestern British Columbia G. Roberti et al. https://doi.org/10.1130/GES01389.1
55. Physical modelling to map the rheological and morphological dynamics along with entrainment mechanics of debris flow: a comprehensive review of the state of the art M. Bilal & R. Kumar https://doi.org/10.1186/s40677-025-00349-1
56. Effects of cylindrical-obstacle spacing on granular shock wave interactions in gravity-driven flows Z. Chen et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2025.10.034
57. Simulating glacial lake outburst floods with a two-phase mass flow model P. Kattel et al. https://doi.org/10.3189/2016AoG71A039
58. Modeling and Simulation of Glacier Avalanche: A Case Study of Gayari Sector Glaciers Hazards Assessment M. Mahboob et al. https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2015.2419171
59. A Multi‐Phase Mass Flow Model S. Pudasaini & M. Mergili https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JF005204
60. A novel depth-averaged model of landslide over erodible bed using (b, s) coordinates V. Pham et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2025.107105
61. Modelling shallow debris flows of the Coulomb-mixture type over temporally varying topography Y. Tai & C. Kuo https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-12-269-2012
62. Computational experiments on the 1962 and 1970 landslide events at Huascarán (Peru) with r.avaflow: Lessons learned for predictive mass flow simulations M. Mergili et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2018.08.032
63. A fifth order WENO scheme for numerical simulation of shallow granular two-phase flow model O. Rabbani et al. https://doi.org/10.1177/16878140211045240
64. Evaluation of approaches to calculate debris-flow parameters for hazard assessment M. Hürlimann et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2008.03.012
65. Modelling and numerical simulation of two-phase debris flows X. Meng & Y. Wang https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-015-0418-4
66. Modelling the temporal-varied nonlinear velocity profile of debris flow using a stratification aggregation algorithm in 3D-HBP-SPH framework Z. Han et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-024-8954-8
67. The local singular boundary numerical model for two-phase debris flow K. Kovářík et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2025.107519
68. A hierarchy of avalanche models on arbitrary topography I. Luca et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00707-009-0165-4
69. A mechanical erosion model for two-phase mass flows S. Pudasaini & J. Fischer https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmultiphaseflow.2020.103416
70. r.avaflow v1, an advanced open-source computational framework for the propagation and interaction of two-phase mass flows M. Mergili et al. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-553-2017
71. Stream function - vorticity formulation of mixture mass flow P. Pokhrel & S. Pudasaini https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2019.103317
72. Rheological characteristics of marine sediments from the Ulleung Basin, East Sea to estimate the mobility of submarine landslides S. Jeong et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11001-022-09473-1
73. Mechanism of the slow-moving landslides in Jurassic red-strata in the Three Gorges Reservoir, China H. Miao et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.12.017
74. Numerical modeling of a high magnitude debris-flow event occurred in Brazil C. dos Santos Corrêa et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-024-06728-5
75. Physical modeling of nonlinear dynamic responses of debris flows through topographically variable paths S. Peng et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2026.109079
76. Influence of Pore Fluid on Grain‐Scale Interactions and Mobility of Granular Flows of Differing Volume A. Taylor‐Noonan et al. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JF006622
77. On analytical solutions of a two-phase mass flow model S. Ghosh Hajra et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nonrwa.2017.09.009
78. Model tests for studying the failure mechanism of dry granular soil slopes R. Chen et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2011.02.001
79. Asymptotic analysis for the propagation and arresting process of a finite dry granular mass down a rough incline K. Lee & F. Yang https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2016.590
80. Evolution of a hillslope by rock avalanches: insights from analog models A. Sembroni et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-019-01229-0
81. Numerical investigation of debris flows using a two-phase continuum model incorporating a visco-inertial rheology Y. Xie et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2022.106797
82. DebrisInterMixing-2.3: a finite volume solver for three-dimensional debris-flow simulations with two calibration parameters – Part 2: Model validation with experiments A. von Boetticher et al. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3963-2017
83. Experimental investigation on erosion mechanisms and morphological evolution of meandering debris flow channels: A case study from Jiwozi, China F. Wang et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2026.108958
84. A general analytical model for superelevation in landslide S. Pudasaini & M. Jaboyedoff https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-019-01333-1
85. Effects of defense-structure system for bridge piers on two-phase debris flow wakes Z. Chen et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-021-01296-5
86. Advances in the simulation of debris flow erosion: The case study of the Rio Gere (Italy) event of the 4th August 2017 T. Baggio et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2021.107664
87. Análisis descriptivos de procesos de remoción en masa en Bogotá A. Ramos et al. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-28132015000200006
88. New Simple Method for Calculating Impact Force on Flexible Barrier Considering Partial Muddy Debris Flow Passing Through D. Tan et al. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002133
89. Turbidity current activity along the flanks of a volcanic edifice: The Mafate volcaniclastic complex, La Réunion Island, Indian Ocean A. Mazuel et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sedgeo.2016.01.020
90. Impact of variation of size of the initial release mass in the dynamics of landslide generated tsunami J. Kafle et al. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793962322500556
91. A novel approach to evaluate and compare computational snow avalanche simulation J. Fischer https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-13-1655-2013
92. Nonhydrostatic granular flow over 3-D terrain: New Boussinesq-type gravity waves? O. Castro-Orgaz et al. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JF003279
93. Evaluation of different erosion–entrainment models in debris-flow simulation S. Lee et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-022-01901-y
94. Interaction of two-phase debris flow with obstacles P. Kattel et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2018.05.023
95. Some exact solutions for debris and avalanche flows S. Pudasaini https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3570532
96. A three-layer model for the flow of particulate suspensions driven by sedimentation A. Bondesan et al. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0261889
97. Numerical insights into rock–ice avalanche geophysical flow mobility through CFD–DEM simulation P. Adhav et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40571-023-00699-3
98. Flow models of fluidized granular masses with different basal resistance terms H. Wu et al. https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2015.8.6.811
99. Dynamic response of submarine obstacles to two-phase landslide and tsunami impact on reservoirs J. Kafle et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00707-019-02457-0
100. DebrisInterMixing-2.3: a finite volume solver for three-dimensional debris-flow simulations with two calibration parameters – Part 1: Model description A. von Boetticher et al. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2909-2016
101. Continuum modelling of flow-structure interaction during the 2009 Cancia debris flow (Italian Dolomites) M. Pirulli et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2026.108971
102. Application of FLATModel, a 2D finite volume code, to debris flows in the northeastern part of the Iberian Peninsula V. Medina et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-007-0102-3
103. Dynamic process of the massive Aru glacier collapse in Tibet X. Bai & S. He https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-019-01337-x
104. Introduction of avalanche dynamics simulator "faSavageHutterFOAM" T. TANABE & H. SHIMIZU https://doi.org/10.5331/seppyo.84.4_297
105. The hypermobility of huge landslides and avalanches S. Pudasaini & S. Miller https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.01.012
106. Oscillation-induced mobility of flows of rock fragments with quasi-rigid plugs in rectangular channels with frictional walls: A hypothesis B. Cagnoli & F. Quareni https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2008.07.009
107. 3D full-loop simulation and experimental verification of gas–solid flow hydrodynamics in a dense circulating fluidized bed X. Wang et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.partic.2013.11.010
108. The Application of the Risk Concept to Debris Flow Hazards S. Fuchs et al. https://doi.org/10.1002/geot.200800013
109. A new data assimilation procedure to develop a debris flow run-out model L. Brezzi et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-015-0625-y
110. A mechanical model for phase separation in debris flow S. Pudasaini & J. Fischer https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmultiphaseflow.2020.103292
111. Some factors affecting mass-front velocity of rapid dry granular flows in a large flume Q. Yang et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2011.06.006
112. Lie symmetry solutions for two-phase mass flows S. Ghosh Hajra et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2015.09.010
113. A 3D Two-Phase Landslide Dynamical Model on GIS Platform A. Tian et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14020564
114. Estimation of flow velocity for a debris flow via the two-phase fluid model S. Guo et al. https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-22-109-2015
115. Shock waves in rapid flows of dense granular materials: Theoretical predictions and experimental results S. Pudasaini & C. Kröner https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.78.041308
116. A comprehensive, unified mechanical erosion model for multi-phase mass flows S. Pudasaini https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmultiphaseflow.2025.105328
117. A simple lumped mass model to describe velocity of granular flows in a large flume Q. Yang et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-012-2250-8
118. Classic, modern, and physics-based rheological laws for geophysical granular flows in a landslide hazard chain M. Kamali Zarch et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2025.105204
119. Important aspects in the formulation of solid–fluid debris-flow models. Part I. Thermodynamic implications K. Hutter & L. Schneider https://doi.org/10.1007/s00161-010-0153-x
120. A general two‐phase debris flow model S. Pudasaini https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JF002186
121. Accelerating high-fidelity debris-flow modeling with a super-resolution deep-learning framework Y. Lv et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2026.108851
122. A multi-layer SPH method to simulate water-soil coupling interaction-based on a new wall boundary model F. He et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enganabound.2024.105755
123. A 2D finite volume model for bebris flow and its application to events occurred in the Eastern Pyrenees V. MEDINA et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-6279(09)60006-8
124. Mechanisms of seepage and overtopping-induced failure in earthen dams: A coupled two-layer SPH investigation S. Zhang et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2026.108344
125. Topographic curvature effects in applied avalanche modeling J. Fischer et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coldregions.2012.01.005
126. The mechanisms of high mobility of a glacial debris flow using the Pudasaini-Mergili multi-phase modeling T. Wang et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2023.107186
127. A Quasi-Single-Phase Model for Debris Flows Incorporating Non-Newtonian Fluid Behavior C. Xia & H. Tian https://doi.org/10.3390/w14091369
128. Dynamics of landslide-generated tsunamis and their dependence on the particle concentration of initial release mass J. Kafle et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euromechflu.2022.10.003
129. An extended quasi two-phase mass flow model K. Khattri & S. Pudasaini https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2018.07.008
130. Input uncertainty propagation methods and hazard mapping of geophysical mass flows K. Dalbey et al. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JB004471
131. A new Savage–Hutter type model for submarine avalanches and generated tsunami E. Fernández-Nieto et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2008.04.039
132. Experimental study of bedrock erosion by granular flows L. Hsu et al. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JF000778
133. A rigorous finite volume model to simulate subaerial and submarine landslide-generated waves S. Yavari-Ramshe & B. Ataie-Ashtiani https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-015-0662-6
134. A two-fluid model for immersed granular avalanches with dilatancy effects E. Montellà et al. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2021.666
135. A depth-averaged debris-flow model that includes the effects of evolving dilatancy. II. Numerical predictions and experimental tests D. George & R. Iverson https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2013.0820
136. Influence of runoff on debris flow propagation at a catchment scale: a case study W. Liu & S. He https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-024-02255-3
137. Avalanching granular flows down curved and twisted channels: Theoretical and experimental results S. Pudasaini et al. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2945304
138. Effect of grain size on mobility of dry granular flows of angular rock fragments: An experimental determination B. Cagnoli & G. Romano https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2010.03.003
139. Coupling of full two-dimensional and depth-averaged models for granular flows B. Domnik et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnnfm.2013.07.005
140. Smooth particle hydrodynamics and discrete element method coupling scheme for the simulation of debris flows M. Trujillo-Vela et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2020.103669
141. On water intrusion and soil porosity in landslide-induced surge waves: A multi-layer SPH analysis of the Vajont disaster Z. Bi et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2026.108081
142. A method to develop the input parameter database for site-specific debris flow hazard prediction under extreme rainfall N. Vasu et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-018-0971-7
143. Superelevation and runup height of debris flows in bends based on typical rectangular cross-sections and gravity center offset S. Tian et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-023-02036-4
144. Discrete element simulations of bed force anomalies due to force chains in dense granular flows J. Estep & J. Dufek https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2012.12.023
145. 3D dynamics of debris flows quantified at sub-second intervals from laser profiles M. Jacquemart et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-017-2993-1
146. Modelling rapid mass movements using the shallow water equations in Cartesian coordinates S. Hergarten & J. Robl https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-671-2015