Page History

...

This benchmark tests all possible trajectories according to the Global check . Those trajectories are:and all possible combinations between the Global and the Detailed checks: 

...

For case A, the same input as benchmark 1-1 (see group 1) is used except for the surface line: the length of the foreland is increased to 160 m (instead of 60 m).

For case B, the same input as benchmark 1-1 (see group 1) is used except for the foreland: an artificial instead of a natural foreland is assumed.

For case C, the same input as benchmark 1-1 (see group 1) is used except for the position of the characteristic point "Insert river channel" which is lowered to get a slope channel of 1 : 7,1.

For case D, the same input as benchmark 1-1 (see group 1) is used.

For case E, the same input as benchmark 1-1 (see group 1) is used except for the state parameter which is equal to -0.06 instead of -0.03.

For case F, the same input as benchmark 1-1 (see group 1) is used except for the state parameter which is equal to -0.06 instead of -0.03, except for the diameters D50 and D15 which are equal to 250 μm and 150 μm resp. for sand layers and except for the channel slope which is 1 : 2 instead of 1 : 6.

For case G, the same input as benchmark 1-1 (see group 1) is used except for the state parameter which is equal to -0.06 instead of -0.03 and except for the diameters D50 and D15 which are equal to 250 μm and 150 μm resp. for sand layers.For the Detailed check, the required probability of failure is 1 per 40000 years instead of 1 per 4000 years and the migration velocity is 0.5m/year instead of 10 mm /year.

...

Results are identical to benchmark 1-1 and can be found in Group 1.

Case E:

Global check - Step 1: Same results as benchmark 1-1 (flow slide would lead to damage on levee) => Go to step 3.

...

See results of benchmark 1-1 in Group 1. 

Results of benchmark 3-1 for case E

...