Critical assessment of jet erosion test methodologies for cohesive soil and sediment

Karamigolbaghi, Maliheh; Ghaneeizad, Seyed Mohammad; Atkinson, Joseph F.; Bennett, Sean J.; Wells, Robert R.

doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2017.08.005

Cited by 17 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Estimated kd values were significantly less for both the MPS-BM and SPS-BM procedures compared with the SPS-SDP and SPS-IP procedures (Table 3; Figure 7b). This result identified a major anomaly using these solution approaches where kd values increased with increasing τc values, and was similarly reported by Karamigolbaghi et al [32]. It is important to note that a wide range (about 1 to 3 orders of magnitude difference) in the estimated τc and kd values were observed among this dataset using different computational procedures.…”

Section: Comparison Of Mps Methods and Computational Procedures For Ersupporting

confidence: 86%

“…These findings also suggest that the τc of the upper soil surface in both laboratory remolded and undisturbed soil samples could be lower compared to soil underneath the surface layer [18,24,26]. Therefore, using the SPS method, estimated τc and kd values likely represent that of the surficial soil Karamigolbaghi et al [32] reported that jet confinement could influence the jet test results and proposed a new value for the coefficient of C f *C d 2 as 0.39 instead of 0.16, which is also introduced in the jet test data analyses equations. Using this new coefficient, test data were also analyzed and termed as modified Blaisdell method (BMM).…”

Section: Comparison Of Sps and Mps Methods For Estimating Critical Shmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…The Blaisdell et al [42] approach is used for equilibrium scour depth calculation and subsequently τ c and k d are calculated [44], however a head loss coefficient of 0.39 was applied as per Karamigolbaghi et al [32] where 0.16 is typically used. The adjusted coefficient addresses the jet confinement in the mini-jet's submergence (tank) test chamber.…”

Section: Modified Blaisdell Methods (Bmm)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(a) (b) Karamigolbaghi et al [32] reported that jet confinement could influence the jet test results and proposed a new value for the coefficient of Cf*Cd 2 as 0.39 instead of 0.16, which is also introduced in the jet test data analyses equations. Using this new coefficient, test data were also analyzed and termed as modified Blaisdell method (BMM).…”

Section: Comparison Of Sps and Mps Methods For Estimating Critical Shmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Due to its smaller size, light weight, and the ease of field operation, the mini-jet device is more applicable for in situ testing on bed and bank surfaces. Al-Madhhachi et al [9] compared in the device test chamber as the scour hole shape develops [32,[34][35][36]. Karamigolbaghi et al [32] suggested that the head loss coefficient in the Blaisdell equation should be modified (BMM), accounting for jet confinement in the mini-jet device test chamber and its effect on scour hole development.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Estimating Erodibility Parameters for Streambanks with Cohesive Soils Using the Mini Jet Test Device: A Comparison of Field and Computational Methods

Mahalder

Schwartz

Palomino

et al. 2018

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The jet test device has been predominantly used for in situ critical shear stress (τ c ) and erodibility coefficient (k d ) measurements of cohesive streambanks/beds using three analytical procedures: the Blaisdell method (BM), the iterative approach (IP), and the scour depth approach (SDP). Existing studies have reported that τ c and k d estimates can be influenced by the computational procedure, time intervals for scour-hole depth measurements, and the pressure head selection. This study compared estimates of τ c and k d among the three computational procedures using single and multiple pressure settings (SPS, MPS). A new method is introduced applying incrementally increasing pressure heads, hypothesizing depth-averaged erodibility parameters would be generated that better represent bank and fluvial erosion. Estimates of τ c applying the MPS-BM procedure were greater by 17% to 100% compared with SPS-BM procedures and k d estimates were lower with less variability (σ = 3.54) compared with other procedures from 126 jet tests among 21 Tennessee stream sites. This finding supports the hypothesis of increasing τ c and decreasing k d with greater soil depths into the bank, suggesting the MPS-BM procedure can improve the estimation of τ c and k d using the mini-jet test device. Overall, this study demonstrates the need to standardize field and computational procedures.

show abstract

Section: Comparison Of Mps Methods and Computational Procedures For Ersupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Comparison Of Sps and Mps Methods For Estimating Critical Shmentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Modified Blaisdell Methods (Bmm)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Comparison Of Sps and Mps Methods For Estimating Critical Shmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Estimating Erodibility Parameters for Streambanks with Cohesive Soils Using the Mini Jet Test Device: A Comparison of Field and Computational Methods

Mahalder

Schwartz

Palomino

et al. 2018

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Gully erosion processes, disciplinary fragmentation, and technological innovation

Bennett

Wells

2018

Earth Surf Processes Landf

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development and evolution of gullies on soil‐mantled hillslopes can devastate agricultural regions and cause widespread soil and landscape degradation. Since 2000, international symposia have been organized to address gully erosion processes, and this paper and special issue provide additional context for the 7th International Symposium on Gully Erosion held at Purdue University in 2016. Several important themes of gully erosion emerged during this symposium that warranted additional discussion here. These topics include the importance and impact of technology transfer, disciplinary fragmentation as an impediment for research advancement, the difficulty in defining the erodibility of sediment within gullies, and the opportunities afforded by remote sensing technology. It is envisioned that such symposia will continue to enhance the capabilities of researchers and practitioners to monitor, model, and manage these important geomorphic processes and to mitigate landscape degradation. © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

On the utilization of mica waste: The pore-fluid chemistry of mica soils and its implication for erosion susceptibility

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Critical assessment of jet erosion test methodologies for cohesive soil and sediment

Cited by 17 publications

References 34 publications

Estimating Erodibility Parameters for Streambanks with Cohesive Soils Using the Mini Jet Test Device: A Comparison of Field and Computational Methods

Estimating Erodibility Parameters for Streambanks with Cohesive Soils Using the Mini Jet Test Device: A Comparison of Field and Computational Methods

Gully erosion processes, disciplinary fragmentation, and technological innovation

On the utilization of mica waste: The pore-fluid chemistry of mica soils and its implication for erosion susceptibility

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About