Advertisement

Acta Geotechnica

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 815–823 | Cite as

Suffusion evaluation of coarse-graded soils from Rhine dikes

  • Ahmed Benamar
  • Ricardo N. Correia dos SantosEmail author
  • Abdelkrim Bennabi
  • Tarek Karoui
Research Paper
  • 84 Downloads

Abstract

An experimental study on internal erosion of coarse-grained soils collected from the Rhine River is presented. The tests performed on laboratory column aim to assess the potential of such soils to suffusion and to characterize their stability and the variation of the soil physical parameters during the suffusion process. An experimental device (large vertical column with 60 cm of height and 26 cm of diameter) has been developed, which allows the application of upward flow to non-cohesive soils under controlled hydraulic loading. The investigation of the parameters affecting the suitability of the soils to suffusion leads to the identification of the hydraulic gradient that initiates the migration of particles to the outlet. The results show an increase in permeability, which is related to the migration and the washing out of fine particles in the upper layer. The particle size distribution of the downward soil layer after test is performed, and the analysis corroborates the localization of particles suffusion. The grain size analysis of the outlet shows that eroded particles are smaller than 500 µm and their size rather increases with increasing hydraulic load. Usual methods based on geometrical criteria proved to overestimate the susceptibility to suffusion of soils from the Rhine, and, therefore, one consider that, for such soils, it is preferable to carry out laboratory tests to evaluate the suffusion process.

Keywords

Dykes Internal erosion Laboratory tests Rhine River Sandy gravel Suffusion 

List of symbols

Cu and Cc

Coefficients of uniformity and curvature, respectively

Fc

Percentage in weight finer than No. 200 sieve (fines content)

G

Specific gravity

Gc

Percentage in weight coarser than No. 4 sieve (gravel content)

dEr/dt

Eroded mass

i

Hydraulic gradient applied

k

Hydraulic conductivity (permeability) of the soil

n

Porosity

t

Time

v

Seepage flow velocity

Q

Flow rate measured in the flow meter

w

Water content of compacted specimens (3%)

γd

Dry unit weight of compacted specimens (19kN/m3)

F

Mass fraction smaller than a given particle diameter D

Η

Mass fraction between D and 4D

Dx

Grain size diameter of soil where x% by weight is finer

Notes

Acknowledgements

The experimental work was conducted in the framework of National Program Research “ERINOH” supported by the French research authority (Ministry) and coordinated by IREX.

References

  1. 1.
    Burenkova V V. (1993) Burenkova(1993) Assessment of suffosion in non-cohesive and graded soils.pdf. First Int Conf Geo-Filters 357–360Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chang DS, Zhang LM (2011) A stress-controlled erosion apparatus for studying internal erosion in soils. Geotech Test J 34:579–589Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chang DS, Zhang LM (2013) Critical hydraulic gradients of internal erosion under complex stress states. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 139:1454–1467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen C, Zhang LM, Zhu H (2017) A photographic method for measuring soil deformations during internal erosion under triaxial stress conditions. Geotech Test J.  https://doi.org/10.1520/gtj20170031
  5. 5.
    Correia dos Santos R, Caldeira L, Maranha das Neves E (2015) Experimental study on crack filling by upstream fills in dams. Géotechnique 65:218–230.  https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.14.P.198 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Correia dos Santos RN, Caldeira LMMS, Maranha das Neves E (2015) Laboratory test for evaluating crack filling during internal erosion in zoned dams. Geotech Test J 38:915–928.  https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ20140074 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Esterhuizen J, Riker RE, Riker RE, et al (2013) Risk of dam failure due to sinkhole formation. In: Assoc. State Dam Saf. Off. Annu. Conf. 2013, Dam Saf. 2013, Sept. 8, 2013 - Sept. 12, 2013. pp 1036–1056Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fannin RJ, Moffat R (2006) Observations on internal stability of cohesionless soils. Géotechnique 56:497–500.  https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2006.56.7.497 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fell R, Wan CF, Cyganiewicz J, Foster M (2003) Time for development of internal erosion and piping in embankment dams. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 129:307–314.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2003) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fell R, Foster M, Cyganiewicz J et al (2008) A unified method for estimating probabilities of failure of embankment dams by internal erosion and piping (dated August 21). UNSW Document UNICIV R 446Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Flores-Berrones R, Ramírez-Reynaga M, Macari EJ (2011) Internal erosion and rehabilitation of an Earth-Rock dam. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 137:150–160.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000371 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    ICOLD (2015) Internal erosion of existing dams, levees and dikes, and their foundations. Volume 1: internal erosion processes and engineering assessment. ICOLD Bull 1:342Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Karoui T (2014) Etude expérimentale de l’érosion de sols homogènes et hétérogènes. Thèse Doctorat, université Le Havre Normandie, FranceGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ke L, Takahashi A (2014) Experimental investigations on suffusion characteristics and its mechanical consequences on saturated cohesionless soil. Soils Found.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2014.06.024 Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kenney TC, Lau D (1985) Internal stability of granular filters. Can Geotech J 22:215–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kenney TC, Lau D (1986) Internal stability of granular filters: reply. Can Geotech J 23:420–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Marot D, Benamar A (2013) Suffusion, transport and filtration of fine particles in granular soil. Eros Geomaterials.  https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118561737.ch2
  18. 18.
    Moffat R, Fannin RJ, Garner SJ (2011) Spatial and temporal progression of internal erosion in cohesionless soil. Can Geotech J 48:399–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Salehi Sadaghiani MR, Witt KJ (2012) Experimental identification of mobile particles in suffusible non cohesive soils. Eur J Environ Civ Eng 15:1155–1165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sherard JL, Dunnigan LP, Talbot J (1984) Filters for silts and clays. J Geotech Eng ASCE 110:701–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sibille L, Marot D, Sail Y (2015) A description of internal erosion by suffusion and induced settlements on cohesionless granular matter. Acta Geotech 10:735–748.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-015-0388-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    To P, Scheuermann A, Williams DJ (2018) Quick assessment on susceptibility to suffusion of continuously graded soils by curvature of particle size distribution. Acta Geotech.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-017-0611-8 Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wan CF, Fell R (2008) Assessing the Potential of Internal Instability and Suffusion in Embankment Dams and Their Foundations. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 134:401–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zhang F, Li M, Peng M et al (2018) Three-dimensional DEM modeling of the stress–strain behavior for the gap-graded soils subjected to internal erosion. Acta Geotech.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-018-0655-4 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UNIHAVRE, CNRS, LOMCNormandie UnivLe HavreFrance
  2. 2.Institut de Recherche en Constructibilité, ESTPUniversité Paris-EstCachanFrance
  3. 3.Geotechnical DepartmentLaboratório Nacional de Engenharia Civil - LNECLisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations