Critical assessment of jet erosion test methodologies for cohesive soil and sediment

- JET results are heavily dependent on underlying assumptions and numerical recipes.
- Flow confinement significantly changes the magnitude of the erosion indices.
- Different factors add a degree of uncertainty into derived erosion indices from JET.
- There are important caveats in derived relationships for τc-kd from the JET results.
- Due to uncertainty in the JET method, its results should be applied with caution.

The submerged Jet Erosion Test (JET) is a commonly used technique to assess the erodibility of cohesive soil. Employing a linear excess shear stress equation and impinging jet theory, simple numerical methods have been developed to analyze data collected using a JET to determine the critical shear stress and erodibility coefficient of soil. These include the Blaisdell, Iterative, and Scour Depth Methods, and all have been organized into easy to use spreadsheet routines. The analytical framework of the JET and its associated methods, however, are based on many assumptions that may not be satisfied in field and laboratory settings. The main objective of this study is to critically assess this analytical framework and these methodologies. Part of this assessment is to include the effect of flow confinement on the JET. The possible relationship between the derived erodibility coefficient and critical shear stress, a practical tool in soil erosion assessment, is examined, and a review of the deficiencies in the JET methodology also is presented. Using a large database of JET results from the United States and data from literature, it is shown that each method can generate an acceptable curve fit through the scour depth measurements as a function of time. The analysis shows, however, that the Scour Depth and Iterative Methods may result in physically unrealistic values for the erosion parameters. The effect of flow confinement of the impinging jet increases the derived critical shear stress and decreases the erodibility coefficient by a factor of 2.4 relative to unconfined flow assumption. For a given critical shear stress, the length of time over which scour depth data are collected also affects the calculation of erosion parameters. In general, there is a lack of consensus relating the derived soil erodibility coefficient to the derived critical shear stress. Although empirical relationships are statistically significant, the calculated erodibility coefficient for a given critical shear stress has an uncertainty of several orders of magnitude. This study shows that JET results should be used with caution and the magnitude of the uncertainty in the derived erodibility parameters should be carefully considered.