Variability of Erodibility Parameters from Laboratory Mini Jet Erosion Tests
Publication: Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 21, Issue 10
Abstract
Application of jet erosion tests (JETs) to study in situ erodibility is gaining popularity. New versions of the JET (original JET versus mini-JET) and new data analysis techniques have introduced questions regarding their operation and data collection procedures. One of the major issues regarding JETs is the high degree of variability of the erodibility parameters (i.e., erodibility coefficient, , and critical shear stress, ). This variability has been attributed to heterogeneity in different soil properties under natural field conditions, but limited research has quantified variability under controlled laboratory conditions, especially for the newer mini-JET. This study uniquely conducted 20 mini-JETs under controlled laboratory conditions on each of two soil types of contrasting texture. Mini-JETs were conducted in situ on streambanks of these same soils in previous research. The laboratory mini-JETs predicted similar values of most parameters with much less variability than in the field. Three to five mini-JETs conducted in the laboratory estimated erodibility parameters with a precision of 25% at a 95% confidence level. Laboratory JETs on disturbed, remolded samples provided baseline estimates of in situ erodibility parameters. Additional mini-JETs were conducted at three different head settings on the two soil types. The influence of the head setting was dependent on the soil type, solution technique, and detachment model. In general, variability in derived erodibility parameters increased at larger head settings especially for the less-erodible soil. Existing mini-JET data were resampled to evaluate the effect of the initial time interval and termination time interval of data collection on derived erodibility parameters. Both initial and termination time intervals were most influential at larger head settings. When the applied pressure head is sufficient to create scouring upon test initiation, an initial time interval of at least 30 s and a termination time interval of at least 300 s is recommended for less-erodible soils.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the financial support of the Buchanan Family Trust through the Buchanan Endowed Chair and the Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station at Oklahoma State University. This project was also supported by Agriculture and Food Research Initiative Competitive Grant No. 2013-51130-21484 from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture and through a FY 2012 319(h) Special Project #C9-00F56701. The authors acknowledge Amanda Fox and Dr. Lucie Guertault for reviewing an earlier version of this manuscript.
References
Al-Madhhachi, A., Hanson, G., Fox, G., Tyagi, A., and Bulut, R. (2013a). “Measuring soil erodibility using a laboratory “mini” JET.” Trans. ASABE, 56(3), 901–910.
Al-Madhhachi, A. T., Hanson, G. J., Fox, G. A., Tyagi, A. K., and Bulut, R. (2013b). “Deriving parameters of a fundamental detachment model for cohesive soils from flume and jet erosion tests.” Trans. ASABE, 56(2), 489–504.
ASTM. (2007). “Standard test method for particle-size analysis of soils.” ASTM D422, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM. (2010). “Standard test methods for liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index of soils.” ASTM D4318, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM. (2012). “Standard test methods for laboratory compaction characteristics of soil using standard effort.” ASTM D698A, West Conshohocken, PA.
Blaisdell, F. W., Anderson, C. L., and Hebaus, G. G. (1981). “Ultimate dimensions of local scour.” J. Hydraul. Div., 107(3), 327–337.
Briaud, J., Ting, F., Chen, H., Cao, Y., Han, S., and Kwak, K. (2001). “Erosion function apparatus for scour rate predictions.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 105–113.
Charonko, C. M. (2010). “Evaluation of an in situ measurement technique for streambank critical shear stress and soil erodibility.” M.S. thesis, Virginia Tech Univ., Blacksburg, VA.
Daly, E. R., Fox, G. A., Al-Madhhachi, A.-S. T., and Storm, D. E. (2015a). “Variability of fluvial erodibility parameters for streambanks on a watershed scale.” Geomorphology, 231, 281–291.
Daly, E. R., Fox, G. A., Al-Madhhachi, A. T., and Miller, R. B. (2013). “A scour depth approach for deriving erodibility parameters from jet erosion tests.” Trans. ASABE, 56(6), 1343–1351.
Daly, E. R., Fox, G. A., Enlow, H. K., Storm, D. E., and Hunt, S. (2015b). “Site-scale variability of streambank fluvial erodibility parameters as measured with a jet erosion test.” Hydrol. Processes, 29, 5451–5464.
Ghaneeized, S. M., Atkinson, J. F., and Bennett, S. J. (2015). “Effect of flow confinement on the hydrodynamics of circular impinging jets: Implications for erosion assessment.” Environ. Fluid Mech., 15(1), 1–25.
Hale, W. E. (1972). “Sample size determination for the log-normal distribution.” Atmos. Environ., 6(1), 419–422.
Hanson, G., and Cook, K. (1997). “Development of excess shear stress parameters for circular jet testing.” ASAE, St. Joseph, MI.
Hanson, G., and Cook, K. (2004). “Apparatus, test procedures, and analytical methods to measure soil erodibility in situ.” Appl. Eng. Agric., 20(4), 455–462.
Hanson, G., and Hunt, S. (2007). “Lessons learned using laboratory JET method to measure soil erodibility of compacted soils.” Appl. Eng. Agric., 23(3), 305–312.
Hanson, G., and Simon, A. (2001). “Erodibility of cohesive streambeds in the loess area of the midwestern USA.” Hydrol. Processes, 15(1), 23–38.
Hanson, G. J., Robinson, K., and Cook, K. (2002). “Scour below an overfall: II. Prediction.” Trans. ASAE, 45(4), 957–964.
Hanson, G. J., Robinson, K. M., and Temple, D. M. (1990). “Pressure and stress distributions due to a submerged impinging jet.” ASCE National Conf. on Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE, Reston, VA, 525–530.
Karmaker, T., and Dutta, S. (2011). “Erodibility of fine soil from the composite river bank of Brahmaputra in India.” Hydrol. Processes, 25(1), 104–111.
McNeil, J., Taylor, C., and Lick, W. (1996). “Measurements of erosion of undisturbed bottom sediments with depth.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 316–324.
MiniTab version 16 [Computer software]. MiniTab, State College, PA.
Moore, W. L., and Masch, F. D. (1962). “Experiments on the scour resistance of cohesive sediments.” J. Geophys. Res., 67(4), 1437–1446.
Partheniades, E. (1965). “Erosion and deposition of cohesive soils.” J. Hydraul. Div., 91(1), 105–139.
Simon, A., Thomas, R., and Klimetz, L. (2010). “Comparison and experiences with field techniques to measure critical shear stress and erodibility of cohesive deposits.” Proc., 2nd Joint Federal Interagency Conf., Las Vegas.
Stein, O., and Nett, D. (1997). “Impinging jet calibration of excess shear sediment detachment parameters.” Trans. ASAE, 40(6), 1573–1580.
Wan, C. F., and Fell, R. (2004). “Laboratory tests on the rate of piping erosion of soils in embankment dams.” Geotech. Test. J., 27(3), 295–303.
Wilson, B. (1993a). “Development of a fundamentally based detachment model.” Trans. ASAE, 36(4), 1105–1114.
Wilson, B. (1993b). “Evaluation of a fundamentally based detachment model.” Trans. ASAE, 36(4), 1115–1122.
Wynn, T., Henderson, M., and Vaughan, D. (2008). “Changes in streambank erodibility and critical shear stress due to subaerial processes along a headwater stream, southwestern Virginia, USA.” Geomorphology, 97(3), 260–273.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 21 • Issue 10 • October 2016
Copyright
© 2016 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Oct 19, 2015
Accepted: Feb 24, 2016
Published online: May 12, 2016
Published in print: Oct 1, 2016
Discussion open until: Oct 12, 2016
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.