An alternative method for interpreting JET erosion test (JET) data: Part 2. Application. Issue 3 (21st November 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Haddadchi, Arman; Rose, Calvin W.; Olley, Jon M.; Brooks, Andrew P.; McMahon, Joe; Pietsch, Timothy
• Is Part Of: Earth surface processes and landforms. Volume 43:Issue 3(2018)
• Page Start: 743
• Page End: 754
• Publication Date: 2017-11-21
• Subjects: jet‐test device -- new theory -- energy conservation -- soil resistance J (J/kg) -- soil erodibility; Geomorphology -- Periodicals; 551.4
• DOI: 10.1002/esp.4270
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0197-9337

Abstract

Abstract: This paper reports the results of jet tester experiments on soil samples of uniform properties which allow quantitative application of the new theory proposed in part 1 of these publications. This theory explores the possibly that a more adequate indicator of soil erodibility may be obtained by using the mass (and so volume) of soil eroded by the jet and the depth of scour penetration, rather than by using penetration depth alone, as assumed in the commonly‐used data interpretation method. It is shown that scour geometry can be well described using a generalized form of the Gaussian function, defined by its standard deviation and maximum depth. Using a published expression for jet kinetic energy flux, the new theory divides this flux into that used to erode soil, and the remainder which is dissipated in a variety of ways. Jet experiments on a specially‐prepared uniform soil sample are reported which provide the key to determining the spatial variability in the profile resistance to erosion offered by field soils. This resistance is expressed in the work required to erode unit mass of soil, denoted as J (in J/kg). The paper also gives results obtained on the profile variation in J for jet tests carried out at riverine sites on the upper Brisbane River, Queensland, Australia. As expected in most natural soil profiles, the results show an increase in J with depth in the profile. The soil resistance ( J ) is compared to the traditional interpretation of soil erodibility, ( k d ). The graphical comparison of these two indicators illustrates the inverse type of relationship between them which is expected from their respective definitions, but this relationship is associated with significant scatter. Possible reasons for this scatter are given, together with comments on jet tester experience in a wide variety of soil types. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Abstract : This paper reports on the application of the new alternative theory for interpreting jet test data given in a companion publication (Rose et al ., 2017) both to specially‐prepared uniform soil sample and to data collected from five riverine sites on the Upper Brisbane River, Queensland, Australia. Jet experiments on uniform soil samples provide the key to determining the work required to erode unit mass of soil, denoted J (in J/kg), as a function of depth in the natural soil profiles.