Comparison of Different Empirical Correlations to Estimate Permeability Coefficient of Quaternary Danube Soils

Abstract

Permeability coefficient is the most significant soil parameter in seepage calculations. It has been recognized that permeability of granular soils is strongly related to the grain size, thus numerous empirical correlations have been developed to estimate permeability using its grain size characteristics. In this study the empirical correlations proposed by Hazen (1911), Carrier (2003) and Chapuis (2004) are evaluated and compared to laboratory measurement results. Quaternary Danube soils are very typical in the Carpathian basin, thus their permeability is an important question in many geotechnical applications.

Review of Construction Risks in a Nuclear Power Plant Environment

“…Construction risk is a multifaceted concept, as shown in Figure 2, it encompasses the project-level risks of a given construction. Such as: design risk: the risk of design adequacy; 1. political risk: the influence of large and mega investments at national and international level; 2. financial risk: the financial security of the client's backing to ensure the continuity of project financing and the sustainability of the project budget; 3. environmental risk: risks arising from geological, meteorological or other factors relating to the site and its immediate surroundings [17,18]; 4. management risk: risk inherent in the decisions of the project managers; 5. construction risk: construction defects inherent in the construction phases; 6. physical risk: a possible pre-planned act of terror/violence or accidental event that may result in structural damage to the project, increase construction time, construction cost; 7. logistical risk: a negative circumstance or obstacle in the procurement and use of all the raw materials and/or equipment necessary for the realisation of the project.…”

Suitability of Engineering-Geological Environment on the Basis of Its Permeability Coefficient: Four Case Studies of Fine-Grained Soils

“…In-situ tests return the most reliable results, however they are costly and technically difficult-erroneous results may be influenced by incomplete recognition of the geological structure of the layer. In laboratory tests, the challenge lies in preparing representative samples for testing, and sample size is limited [15,16]. Empirical formulae, which are widely used, are based mainly on the grain-size of soils and thus their use, although easy and quick, is subject to significant errors.…”