Comparison between the Erosion Function Apparatus and the Ex Situ Scour Testing Device: Preliminary Findings

被引:0
|
作者
Nicks, Jennifer E. [1 ]
Ghaaowd, Ismaail I. [2 ]
Pagenkopf, James [1 ]
Shan, Haoyin [3 ]
Wiblishauser, Otto [3 ]
机构
[1] Fed Highway Adm, Turner Fairbank Highway Res Ctr Geotech Lab, Mclean, VA 22101 USA
[2] High Technol Partners, Turner Fairbank Highway Res Ctr Geotech Lab, Mclean, VA USA
[3] Genex Syst, Turner Fairbank Highway Res Ctr J Sterling Jones, Mclean, VA USA
来源
GEO-CONGRESS 2024: GEOTECHNICS OF NATURAL HAZARDS | 2024年 / 349卷
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
A variety of laboratory devices are available to measure the erosion resistance of soils, each with its own advantages, limitations, and applicability. Two of those devices-the erosion function apparatus (EFA) and the ex situ scour testing device (ESTD)-are very similar in design and concept; however, there are notable differences in geometry and test procedures that can affect the results. As the Federal Highway Administration continues to perform both EFA and ESTD tests as part of its NextScour research efforts, it was critical to evaluate the inherent differences between these devices and more directly compare the resulting erosion rates and hydraulic shear stresses. As part of the initial work, three different engineered soils were prepared and tested in the EFA and ESTD using their respective procedures. Hydraulic shear stresses were then computed based on surface roughness of the specimens and the Moody chart. The preliminary findings indicate that the EFA and ESTD generally yielded comparable shear stresses for all soils. After application of best-fit power functions through the data, the resulting shear stress factors between the EFA and the ESTD were near unity, ranging from 0.92 to 1.13; however, there were larger differences in critical shear stresses-particularly in soils with higher sand content. Additional work is needed on a wider range of soils, but in the interpretation of erosion resistance from laboratory testing, it may be important to understand the device, the flow conditions, and the test methods involved.
引用
收藏
页码:570 / 578
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Erosion of Cohesive Soils with an Ex-situ Scour Testing Device
    Shan, Haoyin
    Guo, Junke
    Shen, Jerry
    Xie, Zhaoding
    Suaznabar, Oscar
    Kerenyi, Kornel
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 35TH IAHR WORLD CONGRESS, VOLS I AND II, 2013, : 5323 - 5330
  • [2] Comparison of Shear Stress in Erosion Function Apparatus and Portable Scouring Testing Device
    Ebrahimi, Mostafa
    Osouli, Abdolreza
    Shoup, Heather Z.
    Malakoutikhah, Hamed
    Farzalizadeh, Roohollah
    GEO-CONGRESS 2024: GEOTECHNICS OF NATURAL HAZARDS, 2024, 349 : 539 - 548
  • [3] Comparison of Shear Stress in Erosion Function Apparatus and Portable Scouring Testing Device
    Ebrahimi, Mostafa
    Osouli, Abdolreza
    Shoup, Heather Z.
    Malakoutikhah, Hamed
    Farzalizadeh, Roohollah
    IFCEE 2024: DRILLED AND DRIVEN FOUNDATIONS AND INNOVATIVE AND EMERGING APPROACHES FOR FOUNDATION ENGINEERING, 2024, 354 : 51 - 60
  • [4] Erosion function apparatus for scour rate predictions
    Briaud, JL
    Ting, FCK
    Chen, HC
    Cao, Y
    Han, SW
    Kwak, KW
    JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, 2001, 127 (02) : 105 - 113
  • [5] Reproducing Log-law Velocity Profiles in an Ex-situ Scour Testing Device
    Shan, Haoyin
    Guo, Junke
    Shen, Jerry
    Xie, Zhaoding
    Suaznabar, Oscar
    Kerenyi, Kornel
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 35TH IAHR WORLD CONGRESS, VOLS I AND II, 2013, : 5514 - 5521
  • [6] The Rotating Erosion Testing Apparatus (RETA): A Laboratory Device for Measuring Erosion Rates versus Shear Stresses of Rock and Cohesive Materials
    Bloomquist, David
    Sheppard, D. Max
    Schofield, Sidney
    Crowley, Raphael W.
    GEOTECHNICAL TESTING JOURNAL, 2012, 35 (04): : 641 - 648
  • [7] Testing for evolutionary change in restoration: A genomic comparison between ex situ, native, and commercial seed sources of Helianthus maximiliani
    Braasch, Joseph E.
    Di Santo, Lionel N.
    Tarble, Zachary J.
    Prasifka, Jarrad R.
    Hamilton, Jill A.
    EVOLUTIONARY APPLICATIONS, 2021, 14 (09): : 2206 - 2220
  • [8] Comparison between in-situ and ex-situ catalytic pyrolysis of sawdust for gas production
    Huo, Xiaodong
    Xiao, Jun
    Song, Min
    Zhu, Li
    JOURNAL OF ANALYTICAL AND APPLIED PYROLYSIS, 2018, 135 : 189 - 198
  • [9] Comparison between SBR Compounds Filled with In-Situ and Ex-Situ Silanized Silica
    Bernal-Ortega, Pilar
    Anyszka, Rafal
    Morishita, Yoshihiro
    di Ronza, Raffaele
    Blume, Anke
    POLYMERS, 2021, 13 (02) : 1 - 15
  • [10] Subspecific identity and a comparison of genetic diversity between wild and ex situ wildebeest
    Caspers, Lauren M.
    Ferrie, Gina M.
    Wolfe, Kristen
    Hoffman, Eric A.
    ZOO BIOLOGY, 2020, 39 (02) : 129 - 140