<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>MultilayerHySEA on aadi.ink</title>
    <link>https://aadi.ink/tags/multilayerhysea/</link>
    <description>Recent content in MultilayerHySEA on aadi.ink</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-gb</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Jul 2026 20:01:08 +0200</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://aadi.ink/tags/multilayerhysea/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>An Efficient Landslide–Tsunami Model with Two-Phase Rheology: Challenges and Implementation</title>
      <link>https://aadi.ink/research/egu26-poster/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2026 20:01:08 +0200</pubDate>
      <guid>https://aadi.ink/research/egu26-poster/</guid>
      <description>&lt;h2 id=&#34;abstract&#34;&gt;Abstract&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Subaerial landslides-induced tsunamis are challenging due to their interaction with air and water.&#xA;This implies the need for modelling granular collision stresses, fluid-grain interaction and impact shock, and also the resulting cratering.&#xA;Fully three-dimensional models can be too computationally expensive in practical use such as for analysing parameter sensitivity.&#xA;Depth-averaged models offer an alternative by enabling faster simulations.&#xA;The challenge then is in retaining essential physical processes in the depth-averaged process.&#xA;This work focuses on the development of a two-phase depth-averaged model designed to simulate both subaerial and submarine landslides and the waves they generate using a variant of the μ(I) landslide model for the granular rheology.&#xA;The approach aims to capture the interaction between solid and fluid phases while maintaining computational efficiency.&#xA;We compare results using this new model (presently under development) with simpler existing models.&#xA;We also cover some key challenges encountered during model formulation and implementation, including mathematical and numerical issues such as ill-posedness, instability, and the need for well-balanced schemes.&#xA;We examine the suitability of various numerical schemes and solvers for this application and present landslide parameter sensitivity analysis.&#xA;Finally, we compare our approach with alternative modelling frameworks to evaluate performance and reliability and briefly discuss gaps in current depth-averaged modelling approaches.&#xA;By addressing these questions, we attempt steps towards advancing efficient and robust tools for simulating landslide-generated waves and improving coastal hazard assessment through embedding more advanced landslide formulations in depth-averaged models.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&#34;https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu26-10451&#34;&gt;https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu26-10451&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
