IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/nathaz/v67y2013i2p937-950.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comparative analysis of interface erosion tests

Author

Listed:
  • Pierre-Louis Regazzoni
  • Didier Marot

Abstract

Interface erosion is one of the main phenomena in dams, dikes and their foundations which may increase their failure risk. In laboratories, the jet erosion test (JET) and the hole erosion test (HET) are commonly used for the evaluation of the sensibility of interface erosion of fine soils. The results are interpreted by two distinct methods that are valid for one test only. A new energy analysis of the tests is developed, relating the total eroded mass to the dissipated fluid energy, and a new erosion resistance index is proposed. Seven naturally occurring fine-grained soils, covering a large range of erodibility, are compacted with the Proctor protocol, and they are tested with the two devices. It was shown that by using the commonly used methods, the values of the erosion coefficient are systematically higher with the JET than with the HET and the HET critical shear stress is about fifty times higher than the JET critical shear stress. Thus, the relative soil classifications yielded by the two erodimeters are not exactly the same. Based on energy analysis, values of erosion resistance index are roughly the same for each tested soil with the two apparatuses and a single classification of soil erodibility is obtained. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Pierre-Louis Regazzoni & Didier Marot, 2013. "A comparative analysis of interface erosion tests," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 67(2), pages 937-950, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:67:y:2013:i:2:p:937-950
    DOI: 10.1007/s11069-013-0620-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11069-013-0620-3
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11069-013-0620-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:67:y:2013:i:2:p:937-950. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.