Laboratory and In Situ Determination of Hydraulic Conductivity and Their Validity in Transient Seepage Analysis

This paper critically compares the use of laboratory tests against in situ tests combined with numerical seepage modeling to determine the hydraulic conductivity of natural soil deposits. Laboratory determination of hydraulic conductivity used the constant head permeability and oedometer tests on un...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Water (Basel) 2021-04, Vol.13 (8), p.1131
Main Authors: Nam, Soonkie, Gutierrez, Marte, Diplas, Panayiotis, Petrie, John
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Analysis
Anisotropy
Book publishing
Clay
Dams
Expected values
Field tests
Groundwater
Groundwater levels
Hydraulics
Hydrogeology
In situ tests
Laboratories
Laboratory tests
Natural resources
Netherlands
Permeability
Research methodology
Sample disturbance
Seepage
Soil permeability
Soil structure
Soils
United States
Validity
Water table
Water, Underground
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This paper critically compares the use of laboratory tests against in situ tests combined with numerical seepage modeling to determine the hydraulic conductivity of natural soil deposits. Laboratory determination of hydraulic conductivity used the constant head permeability and oedometer tests on undisturbed Shelby tube and block soil samples. The auger hole method and Guelph permeameter tests were performed in the field. Groundwater table elevations in natural soil deposits with different hydraulic conductivity values were predicted using finite element seepage modeling and compared with field measurements to assess the various test results. Hydraulic conductivity values obtained by the auger hole method provide predictions that best match the groundwater table’s observed location at the field site. This observation indicates that hydraulic conductivity determined by the in situ test represents the actual conditions in the field better than that determined in a laboratory setting. The differences between the laboratory and in situ hydraulic conductivity values can be attributed to factors such as sample disturbance, soil anisotropy, fissures and cracks, and soil structure in addition to the conceptual and procedural differences in testing methods and effects of sample size.
ISSN:2073-4441
2073-4441
DOI:10.3390/w13081131