Experimental study of internal erosion on cohesive soils

Fateh Bendahmane, Didier Marot, Alain Alexis & Frdric Rosquot

GeM, Institut de Recherche en Gnie Civil et Mcanique, I.U.T. de Saint-Nazaire,
Saint-Nazaire Cedex, France

ABSTRACT: Under the internal flow, hydraulic earthstructure (dike, levee, or dam) can incur a migration
of particles. This migration induced a modification of particles size distribution and a variation of hydraulical
and mechanic characteristics. This modification can generate instabilities: sliding, overtopping or even failures.
The occurrence of breach in new earthstructure shows the urgency to improve the design rules of this point.
We propose a parametric study on sand/kaolinite samples. The experimental device consists of three modified
triaxial cells which allow controlling the sample confinement, preventing any parasitic flow and surveying
great deformations of samples. The first tests carried out show the good repeatability and the validity of the
experimental devices. Different aspects of the initiation of internal erosion are clarified: if migration of fine
particles is important, the skeleton of sample is unstable and causes the breaking down.

1 INTRODUCTION To design the earthstructure, the internal erosion

The water presence in the earthstructures are likely
to undergo irreversible damages due to three differ-
ent mechanisms (sliding, overtopping and internal
erosion). Internal erosion appears to be one of the
main cause of in-situ instabilities. Among the 11,192
already surveyed dams by Foster et al. (2000), 136
show dysfunctions, which are divided up as 5.5% for
sliding, 46% for internal erosion and 48% for over-
topping. Internal erosion is due to the transport and
migration under the action of flow, of some particles
constituting the structure. Improvements in the under-
standing of internal erosion mechanisms are hindered
by their complexity and detection difficulties. The
earthstructure material hydraulic and mechanical char-
acteristics are then altered. The material permeability,
for instance, undergoes sharp changes, which cause
losses of tightness or interstitial overpressure. The
migration of particles is prejudicial to the structural
stability and induce structure failure.
Internal erosion mechanisms are complex and
involve many parameters, coupled or not. Laboratory
test sample to identify specific mechanisms are no
less easier and account for the differences in inter-
pretation within a same test campaign (Monnet, 1998;
Skempton & Brogan, 1994). The two main phenom-
ena responsible for migration of particles are piping
and suffusion. In order to reduce internal erosion
risks, hydraulic earthstructures often include a filter
component usually laid below the downstream face.
criteria do not consider the hydraulics/mechanics cou-
pling and the simultaneous influence and interactions
of the main parameters (porosity, grain size, confin-
ing, gradient, filter). The great number of param-
eters affecting the different phenomena shows the
importance of taking experimental precautions.
A parametric study started in GeM (Saint-Nazaire
France) to provide a new data on the effect on internal
erosion is realized with a new experimental device.
Because of their implementation, use and money-
saving capabilities, most authors have conducted
tests using rigid cell permeameters (Lafleur, 1999;
Tomlinson & Vaid, 2000; Reddi et al. 2000). Draw-
backs come from the confinement characteristics,
which are uniaxial, and from the existence of parasitic
flows between the sample and the cell. In order to
reduce such flows, a rubberlike diaphragm has been
introduced between the rigid cell and the sample
compacted within the cell (Kenney & Lau, 1985).
It follows from this that the cell should preferably
consist of a supple wall to prevent the appearance
of parasitic flows, on the one hand, and control the
sample confinement, which affects soil structure, on
the other hand. Some authors (Tomlinson & Vaid,
2000; Hameiri & Fannin, 2002) have tested samples
consisting of glass spheres because of satisfying test
repeatability. They, however, cannot account for cohe-
sive soils and grain angularities.Yet, their employment
capabilities make it possible to anticipate satisfactory
results as to their use for phenomenological tests. The

607
Copyright 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK
use of naturally heterogeneous and specific samples
confront us with the problem of the generalization of
the results and test repeatability. Consequently, using
reconstituted samples (Reddi & Bonala, 1997) appears
to be a satisfactory way to represent natural cohesive
soils while satisfying sample preparation repeatabil-
ity (homogenization by mixing before consolidation).
So as to prevent liquefaction and identify the actions
of both suffusion and piping more efficiently, samples
must be subjected to downflows. Grain entrainment
is increased when both the flowrate and the exter-
nal stress grow (Papamichos et al. 2001). Moreover,
Tomlinson and Vaid (2000) have underlined that the
influence of the pressure gradient increases velocity.
The size of the filter pore opening and its thickness
are determining in phenomenon variability (Lafleur,
1999). Therefore, testing different openings and thick-
nesses is essential. Considering the length of the tests,
automation is advisable.
2 EXPERIMENTAL DEVICE
2.1 Description
The device consists of modified triaxial cells coupled
to two pressure/volume controllers (GDS), placed in a
temperature-controlled chamber (20 C). Three triax-
ial cells, which can be used simultaneously for the best
possible management of the test duration. The satura-
tion, consolidation, the hydraulic and the mechanical
tests are carried out inside the same cell without
deconfining to avoid disturbances on the samples
(figure 1).
Triaxial cells have been modified to permit the
flow in the samples while limiting head losses and to
discharge fine particles washed away by the process
without clogging the drainage system.
The injection head consists of a 22 mm glass sphere
layer to diffuse the fluid on the sample uniformly. At
the bottom of the sample, the funnel-shaped draining
system is specially designed to avoid clogging or the
Figure 1. Photograph of the experimental device.
608
Copyright 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK
formation of a layer of particles within the system.
This draining system makes it possible to use different
filters, which can be either rigid or geotextile with
openings ranging between 0.001 mm to 8 mm and a
maximum thickness of 17 mm (figure 2).
The hydraulic system consists of different elements
generating pressures and depressions, which can oper-
ate on the three triaxial cells simultaneously. The GDS
is used to inject up to 200 cm3 of statically or dynam-
ically pressurized fluid with a resolution of 1 kPa and
1 mm3 . Three pressure regulators for the triaxial cells
are connected to air/water interface cylinders. These
pressure regulators are used to generate and maintain
constant pressures. The maximum pressure is 600 kPa
with a maximum flow-rate of 74 mm3 /s.
In order to detect internal erosion initiation point
and carried out real-time measurements of the eroded
grain quantity, an optical sensor has been developed.
Placed on the transparent pipe connecting the triaxial
cell to the effluent tank, it measures the transparency
of the fluid coming through the pipe. Thanks to a pre-
liminary calibration, it possible to find a relationship
between transparency and the effluent solid contents
(figure 3).
The data acquisition is performed automatically by
a computer.
2.2 Test procedure
The cohesive soil samples are reconstituted using a
washed Loire sand (table 1) and two different type of
clay: kaolinite (table 2) and bentonite (table 3).
Figure 2. The injection head and the draining system.
 Table 3. Bentonite characteristics.

Grain size (mm) Frequency (% finer)

0.010 98
0.005 89
0.001 76
0.0002 60
Liquid limits. wl (%) 440
Plastic limit. wp (%) 60
Volumic weight of grains (kN/m3 ) 27.6

3 TESTS AND ANALYSIS

The preparation of cohesive sample is divided into

three steps:
First, production and installation: the repeatability
of the production is guaranteed by the following
procedure. The sand is first mixed during 3 minutes
at a water content of 8%. While mixing contin-
ues, clay is progressively added and mixing is then
carried on during 10 minutes. This method has
been validated through confirmation of the size
distribution homogeneity achieved after mixing.
Figure 3. Triaxial cell and the effluent tank. The installation of the sample inside the cell
requires preliminary forming using a 50 mm diam-
eter and 50 mm high mould under the action of
two pistons until required dry density is reached
Table 1. Loire sand characteristics.
(Bendahmane, 2001).
Grain size (mm) Frequency (% finer) Second, saturation: this phase begins when a light
confinement pressure is applied to prevent any par-
1 100 asitic flow between the sample and the membrane.
0.5 60 Saturation with distilled water is then slowly com-
0.4 45 pleted (24 hours) to prevent small particles from
0.2 25 migrating.
0.1 4 Third, consolidation: the cohesive sample is con-
0.08 0 solidated at 200 kPa during 24 hours. Pressure,
Uniformity coefficient 3.125 therefore, increases in stages for a length of time
Volumic weight of grains (kN/m3 ) 26 depending on clay percentage and properties of
sample.

Table 2. Kaolinite characteristics. 3.1 Comparison and validation tests

The validation of tests is carried out by reproducing
Grain size (mm) Frequency (% finer)
an experiment described by Kenney et al. (1992). The
0.060 100 test chosen consists in testing samples made of sand
0.010 94 and bentonite with a sand/bentonite weight ratio of 8%.
0.005 80 The device used by Kenney is a rigid cell permeameter
0.002 47 with an axial consolidation of 70 kPa, a hydraulic gra-
0.001 18 dient of 15 m/m and distilled water as fluid.The sample
dimensions are 50 mm2 for the section and 25 to 30 mm
Liquid limits. wl (%) 55
Plastic limit. wp (%) 22 for the height. The hydraulic permeability measured
Volumic weight of grains (kN/m3 ) 27 ranges between 2.11010 to 2.2 1010 m/s. The sam-
ples used for the validation have been reconstituted in

609
Copyright 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK
 Table 4. Performed tests. 0.60

Concentration (mg/cm3)
kaolinite Filter i n0 0.50
Sample (%) (mm) (m/m) (.) 0.40
0.30 Sample 31A, i=27m/m
23 10 0.08 4 0.33 Sample 23, i=4m/m
31A 10 0.08 27 0.33 0.20
29B 10 4 2 0.33 0.10
27 10 4 4 0.33
47 10 4 8 0.33 0.00
0 100 200 300 400
36A 10 4 27 0.33
Time (s)
20 30 0.08 32 0.30
19 30 0.08 110 0.30
14 30 4 44 0.30 Figure 4. Evolution of instantaneous concentration of
17 30 4 48 0.30 effluent.
16 30 4 92 0.30
21 30 4 168 0.30
0.3

Erosion rate (mg/s)

0.25
0.2
the same sand/bentonite proportions and with an iden- Sample 31A, i=27m/m
tical sand size distribution. The permeability measured 0.15 Sample 23, i=4m/m
on three different samples with the new device is near 0.1
to 2.37 1010 m/s. Finally a good agreement between 0.05
the results obtain by test realized in triaxial cell mod-
0
ified and the value found in the literature, permit a 0 100 200 300 400
validation of the experimental procedure. Time (s)

Figure 5. Erosion rate with 0.08 mm filter and 10%

3.2 Results and discussion kaolinite (samples 31 A, 23).
The tests are performed on the sand kaolinite samples
with 10% and 30% of kaolinite. The moisture content
of 8% was used, which corresponds to a compacted Sample 27, i=4m/m
0.05 Sample 29B, i=2m/m
dry unit weight of 17 kN/m3 . The confinement pres- 0.045
Erosion rate (mg/s)

sure are fixed at 200 kPa, that represent for the soil 0.04
0.035
sample a 12 m depth. The water injection is performed 0.03
with a constant hydraulic gradient. We use two filter 0.025
opening sizes: 4 mm to study the migration of all par- 0.02
0.015
ticle (sand and kaolinite), and 0.08 mm to analyze the 0.01
behaviour of clay particles only. The parametric study 0.005
is summarized in table 4. 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Time (s)
3.2.1 Test for 10% of kaolinite
For 0.08 mm filter opening size and 4 m/m applied
Figure 6a. Erosion rate with 4 mm filter and 10% kaolinite
hydraulic gradient (sample 23) no internal erosion
(low gradient, samples 27, 29B).
appears. Whereas, with a 27 m/m hydraulic gradient
(sample 31A), migration of clay particles appears. The
evolution of instantaneous solid concentration of the
effluent (figure 4) is transformed to obtain a more migration observed for the 29B sample) whereas, an
significative parameter: the erosion rate qs (t) (eroded i = 4 m/m induces a little migration of clay particles
mass per second or solid flow rate). (figure 6a, sample 27).An i = 8 m/m generates a strong
clay migration (sample 47).
An important migration of particles under a high
hydraulic gradient (i = 27 m/m) induces a drastic ero-
with: sion rate (figure 6b), the optical sensor reach thus
C(t): Concentration; the maximum of signal (corresponding to 6 mg/s).
qwi (t): Fluid flow rate. This important erosion is accompanied by a struc-
tural modification on the sample base (migration of
For a 4 mm filter opening size, a hydraulic gradient sand and clay particles) and finally generates collapses
of i = 2 m/m do not modify the sample (no particles (figure 7).

610
Copyright 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK
 7 0.009 Sample 16, i=92m/m
Erosion rate (mg/s)

0.008 Sample 17, i=48m/m

Erosion rate (mg/s)

6 Sample 14, i=44m/m
0.007
5 Sample 36A, i=27m/m
0.006
Sample 47, i=8m/m
4 0.005
3 0.004
0.003
2 0.002
1 0.001
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 0 100 200 300 400
Time (s) Time (s)

Figure 6b. Erosion rate with 4 mm filter and 10% kaolinite Figure 8a. Erosion rate with 4 mm and 30% kaolinite.
(high gradient, samples 36 A, 47).
5 Sample21, i=168m/m
4.5

Erosion rate (mg/s)

4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 100 200 300 400
Time (s)

Figure 8b. Erosion rate with 4 mm and 30% kaolinite (very

high gradient).

erosion (qs > 1 mg/s). The rests of test show moderate

erosion the clay fraction appears to strongly influ-
ence the soil erodibility. The performed test tend to
show that for 10% kaolinite samples the erosion rate
is about to times higher than for 30% kaolinite sam-
ples. Erosion rate increases with hydraulic gradient
from moderate erosion (above a certain gradient value
strongly depending on granulometry and filter) to high
erosion. With 4 mm filter opening size this critical gra-
dient is about 3 m/m for 10% of kaolinite and 45 m/m
for 30% of kaolinite. With 0.08 mm filter this critical
gradient seems to reach 2 or 3 times the precedent
values. Consequently the filter opening size is not
the important parameter to qualify erosion rate, in
Figure 7. Photography of structural modification (sample complement with the hydraulic gradient.
36 A).

3.2.2 Test for 30% of kaolinte 4 CONCLUSIONS

The same influence of the hydraulic gradient and the
filter on internal erosion is observed on the samples
with 30% of kaolinite. No erosion with a 0.08 mm filter
opening size is observed with a hydraulic gradient up
to 110 (sample 19, 20). Moreover, with a 4 mm filter
opening size, very little rate (figure 8a) of erosion is
observed up to 92 m/m hydraulic gradient, whereas a
very high hydraulic gradient (168 m/m) generate an
important clay erosion (figure 8b).
All the requests of performed test underline very
different magnitude of erosion rate some test show
no erosion (qs < 1g/s), some other tests show high
Mechanisms responsible for internal erosion are many
evolutionary and depend on different parameters. In
the face of such complexity, internal erosion initia-
tion and development criteria found in the literature
are closely dependent on the structure studied and,
therefore diverse.
The experimental device can be used to saturate and
consolidate reconstituted sand/clay samples. The tri-
axial cells used for this parametric study have been
modified to let the flow comes through up to the
sample.

611
Copyright 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK
 The first test realized permit on the hand, the com-
parison between the test carried out with the modified
triaxial cells and results obtain by Kenney et al. (1992)
on sand/bentonite. This comparison demonstrates the
good repeatability of the tests and validates the exper-
imental procedure. On the other hand, we have studied
the mechanism which induce the internal erosion for
a sand/kaolinite sample.
All tests are performed for sand/clay sample with 10
and 30% and kaolinite for a hydraulic gradient between
2 and 168 m/m.
We have shown for sand/kaolinite samples that it is
possible to reduce the migration of particles if we
used a geotextiles filter. Moreover, if we increased
the clay percentage in sample we established that
sample have a better erosion resistance.
The internal erosion begins by a migration of fine
particles to the downstream side of sample. If the
quantity of eroded fine particles is important, the
sample structure is modified and then the transport
of sand particles occurs. Finally the skeleton of sam-
ple is unstable and causes the breaking down. Sand
erosion cant be characterized by the present con-
figuration of a device. Further developments are
needed by the mean of a mass balance include in
the chain of measurements.
To extend this study, we have to carried out some
complementary tests with different sand/clay ratio and
filter opening sizes. We intend to use the capacity of
our device to take into account the effect of confining
pressure on the internal erosion kinetics.
REFERENCES
Bendahmane, F. 2002. Influence de lcoulement sur la rsis-
tance des sols: tude exprimentale prliminaire. Master
report, Universit de Nantes.
612
Copyright 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK
Foster, M. Fell, R. & Spannagle, M. 2000. The statistics
of embankment dam failures and accidents. Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 37:10001024.
Fry, J.J., Degoutte, G. & Goubet, A. 1997. Lrosion interne:
typologie, dtection et reparation. Barrages & Rservoirs,
no 6:0126.
Hameiri, A. & Fannin, R.J. 2002. A cyclic gradient ratio test
device. Geotechnical Testing Journal; 25(3):266276.
Kenney, T.C. & Lau, D. 1985. Internal stability of granular
filters. Canadian Geotechnical Journal; 22:215225.
Kenney, T.C., Van veen, W.A., Swallow, M.A. & Sun-
gaila, M.A. 1992. Hydraulic conductivity of compacted-
sand mixtures. Canadian Geotechnical. Journal, Vol. 29:
364374.
Lafleur, J. 1999. Selection of gotextiles to filter broadly
graded cohesionless soils. Geotextiles and Geomem-
branes; 17:299312.
Monnet, A. 1998. Boulance, rosion interne, renard.
Les instabilits sous coulement. Revue Franaise de
Gotechnique; 82:310.
Papamichos, E., Vardoulakis, I., Tronvoll, J. & Skjrstein, A.
2001. Volumetric sand production model and experi-
ment. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical
Methods in Geomechanis; 25:789808.
Reddi, L.N. & Bonala, M.V.S. 1997. Critical shear stress and
its relationship with cohesion for sand-Kaolinite mixtures.
Canadian Geotechnical Journal; 34:2633.
Reddi, L.N., Lee, I. & Bonala, M.V.S. 2000. Comparison
of internal and surface erosion using flow pump test on
a sand-kaolinite mixture. Geotechnical Testing Journal;
23(1):116122.
Skempton,A.W. & Brogan, J.M. 1994. Experiments on piping
in sandy gravels. Gotechnique; 44(3):440460.
Tomlinson, S.S. & Vaid, Y.P. 2000. Seepage forces and
confining pressure effects on piping erosion. Canadian
Geotechnical Journal; 37:113.