AESM 1700

Consolidation of soils

Consolidation in a river bed

March 13, 2017 C. Jommi

S. Muraro
C. Zwanenburg
1 Potential head response to tidal fluctuations

1.1 Statement of the problem and data

For the reinforcement of a river dike, information on the development of hydraulic head in the
sand layer during design conditions is required. The situation is simplified into a two-layered
system, schematically depicted in Figure 1. The relevant parameters of the two layers are given in
Table 1.

The pore pressure fluctuation due to the tidal effect can be described as

u(0,t)  H0 cos(t) (1)

with the maximum pore pressure increase H0 and the tidal period T given in Table 1, and

2
 (2)
T

river (tidal)
dike

z aquitard x
aquifer

Figure 1. Schematic drawing of the subsoil of the dyke

Table 1. Hydraulic loads and relevant soil parameters

Hydraulic load period T (hours) 12.5

Maximum pore pressure fluctuation  H0 (kPa) 40
Aquitard  d (m) 5
  ’  kPa‐1 1. * 10‐3
  k’ m/s 5. * 10‐7
Aquifer  D (m) 20
   kPa‐1 2.5 * 10‐5
  k m/s 5. * 10‐4
1.2 Questions

1. Draw the graph of the pore water pressure fluctuation, us, in the sand layer as a function of
distance, x, for t = 0., 3.175, 6.25 and 9.375 hours (draw the distance x on the horizontal axis
and the pore water pressure us on the vertical axis);

2. Draw the graph of the pore water pressure, uc, in the clay layer at the distances
x =  for t = 0., 3.175, 6.25 and 9.375 hours (draw one graph per location,
with the pore pressure uc on the horizontal axis as a function of z on the vertical axis);

3. Draw the graph of the pore water pressure, uc, in the clay layer at the distances x1 = 50m
and x2 = 100m for t = 0., 3.175, 6.25 and 9.375 hours;

4. What happens if the stiffness of the sand layer increases? Draw the graphs as defined in
questions 1 and 3 for sand → 0, and comment the result;

5. What happens if the permeability of the clay layer changes? Draw the same graphs as defined
in questions 1 and 3 for clay → , and comment the result;

6. Show the same graphs for very permeable and stiff sand layer and comment the results;

7. Show the same graphs for a completely impermeable clay layer and comment the results.

2 Potential head response to river level fluctuations

2.1 Statement of the problem and data

The location along the river Lek at the center of the village Krimpen aan den Lek is situated at
approximately 35 km from the coast.

A road parallel to the river is located on the crest of the dike (Figure 2). The buildings between
the road and river are situated on the foreland. The subsoil consists of a 10 m thick impermeable
top layer on a 30 m thick sand layer.

The potential head response is measured in two stand-pipes, III and IV, at a distance of
xIII = 450 m and xIV = 470 m from the river Lek. Table 2 gives the readings at stand-pipes III and
IV and river level measurements.

Figure 2. Krimpen aan den Lek: III and IV indicate the locations of standpipes III and IV, respectively.
2.2 Data measured

Table 2. Hydraulic head at the river and at stand pipes III and IV locations (referred to NAP)

Stand pipe III Stand pipe IV
date elapsed time river head sand layer head sand layer head
[ hours] [NAP  m] [NAP m] [NAP m]

1999‐03‐22 0.00 0.25 0.053 ‐0.028

1.00 0.35 0.018 ‐0.023
2.00 0.68 0.163 0.102
3.00 1.26 0.393 0.382
4.00 1.68 0.738 0.707
5.00 1.75 0.908 0.852
6.00 1.67 0.963 0.887
7.00 1.21 0.768 0.737
8.00 0.79 0.613 0.507
9.00 0.5 0.413 0.287
10.00 0.38 0.238 0.152
11.00 0.36 0.278 0.097
12.00 0.34 0.113 0.052
13.00 0.29 0.063 0.012

2.3 Questions

Use the measurements in Table 2 to:

1. Find a value for the decay f ;

2. Find a value for the delay Ψ

3. Give an estimation for λ and a ;

4. Predict the hydraulic head at the location of the stand pipe, when the river level rises to NAP
+ 5 m during a storm surge, having the same period of about 13 hours.

2.4 Solution

The measurements in Table 2 provide the value of the hydraulic head at the river side and in two
standpipes. In order to start the analysis, it is necessary to compute the oscillation of the
hydraulic head with respect to the mean value for each standpipe

The mean values are computed from the maximum and minimum readings as

H , H ,
H 1.0 m
2

H , H ,
H 0.49 m
2

H , H ,
H 0.43 m
2

The oscillation around the mean level is then

∆H H H

∆H H H

∆H H H

0.8
River
Standpipe III
Standpipe IV

0.4

-0.4

-0.8
0:00 4:48 9:36 14:24
time

Figure 3. Evolution of hydraulic head oscillation with time

As it can be appreciated from Fig.3, the response in the sand layer measured by the standpipes is
characterised by a time delay and a reduction in the amplitude (decay) due to the hydraulic head
dissipation (leakage) through the porous medium.

By plotting together the oscillation of the hydraulic head in the river with the ones in the sand
layer, we obtain the typical tilted ellipse.

0.8

0.4

-0.4
Standpipe III
Standpipe IV

-0.8
-0.8 -0.4 0 0.4 0.8
Hsand (m) NAP

Figure 4. Tilted ellipse for standpipe III and standpipe IV as a function of the river hydraulic head
oscillation

In order to determine the decay and the delay two approaches can be followed:
- standard approach based on the construction of the tilted ellipse;
- simplified approach based on the oscillation measurements in Fig. 3.
Standard approach

The solution is presented for the case of standpipe III. The same concept applies for the
standpipe IV.

The geometrical properties of the tilted ellipse have to be determined first:

- inclination with respect to the horizontal, θ;
- major semi-axis, m;
- minor semi-axis, n.

Figure 4. Properties of the tilted ellipse for standpipe III

From the graphical construction of Fig. 4 and assuming that the data can be represented by an
ellipse we have:

- θ = 57.8°
- m = 0.84;
- n = 0.2.

The following relations hold

delay
mn
Ψ arctan
cos θ sin θ m n

decay

m n tan θ
f
n m tan θ
Once the ellipse properties are known, it is then possible to determine the decay and delay.
Moreover from the harmonic response of a semi-confined aquifer, the following relations hold

x
f exp
λ

a x
Ψ
λ

From the above equations, knowing the delay and the decay in correspondence of a given
distance x from the river, the cyclic leakage factor λ and delay factor a can be derived

x
λ
ln f

Ψ
a
ln f

From the results previously obtained, we have

- decay f = 0.67
- delay Ψ = 0.52

As the input wave has a period T = 13 hours, the delay in time is

Ψ Ψ
Δt 64 min
ω 2π
T

Knowing the distance from the river of the standpipe III, x=450 m, the cyclic leakage factor and
the delay factor are

450
λ 1111 m
ln 0.67

0.52
a 1.3
ln 0.67

Having determined all the parameters, we can now predict the hydraulic head at the location of
the standpipe III, when the river level rises to NAP + 5 m during a storm surge. Following the
assumption given previously, the same period T ≈ 13 hours is assumed.

We first define the oscillation of the river level around its mean level

∆H 5 H 4 m

The evolution of the hydraulic head oscillation in the sand layer (aquifer) is expressed as
(harmonic consolidation in a two layers system)

x ax
∆H x, t ∆H exp cos ωt
λ λ
In the case examined x = 450 m
The result is reported in Fig. 5.
 4

-2

Standpipe III

-4
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
normalised time, t/T (-)

Figure 5. Prediction of the hydraulic head oscillation in the standpipe III due to a raise to NAP + 5 m of the
river level

The maximum rise in the hydraulic head at the standpipe III is about 2.65 m which added at the
mean level at this location, 0.49 m, gives a final hydraulic head of 3.14 m. As it can be
appreciated, the response in the standpipe is characterised by a delay and a decay.

Simplified approach

Based on Fig. 3, the decay is defined as the ratio of the maximum oscillation in the standpipe
over the one of the river. The delay is the time lapse between the two peaks, as shown in Fig. 6.

0.8
River
Standpipe III

0.4

-0.4

-0.8
0:00 4:48 9:36 14:24
time

Figure 6. Simplified approach for estimating the decay and delay for standpipe III

Decay
0.47
f≅ 0.63
0.75

Delay
Δt 06: 00 05: 00 1 h