Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun. 2020, 68, 669-678

https://doi.org/10.11118/actaun202068040669
Published online 2020-08-30

Comparison of Hydraulic Conductivity Values Obtained from Empirical Formulae and Laboratory Experiments

Mario Hala1, Lubomír Petrula1, Zakaraya Alhasan2

1Institute of Water Structures, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Brno University of Technology, Antonínská 548/1, 601 90 Brno, Czech Republic
2Institute of Geotechnics, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Brno University of Technology, Antonínská 548/1, 601 90 Brno, Czech Republic

Received October 20, 2018
Accepted August 17, 2020

Hydraulic conductivity determination plays an essential role in the investigation of groundwater flow regime which can then influence many field problems such as pumping capabilities in the area, transport of contaminant or heat and soil internal erosion. Numerous equations based on dimensional analysis or experimental measurements have been published since the end of the 19th century for the determination of hydraulic conductivity. However, not all of these formulae are applicable for every material and all of them bring some uncertainty in the value of hydraulic conductivity. This paper contains a description of experimental research carried out concerning the determination of hydraulic conductivity for four types of sand with different grain size distribution curves and variable porosity. Obtained values of hydraulic conductivity ranged from 1 × 10-4 to 4 × 10-3 according to the sample porosity. The series of experiments consisted of 160 separate tests conducted in order to obtain relevant statistical sets. In this paper, the experimental data are discussed and compared with hydraulic conductivities obtained from 6 empirical formulae recommended in a previous study. The comparison showed that some empirical formulae provide a good agreement with the experimental data (the most precise were formulae published by Terzaghi and by Sauerbrey). However, some formulae showed high deviation from measured data (formula published by Zamarin).

Funding

This study was supported by the following projects: FAST-J-18-5328: The Problematics of external suffosion /heave (boiling) and FAST-J-20-6315 Determination of the uncertainties at selected hydraulic problems.

References

17 live references