...

Group 1: Benchmarks from literature (exact solution)

This section describes a number of benchmarks for which an exact analytical solution can be found in the literature.

1.1. Study Case described in "Technisch Rapport Voorland Zettingsvloeiing"

Description

Group 1: Benchmarks from literature (exact solution)

This section describes a number of benchmarks for which an exact analytical solution can be found in the literature.

1.1. Study Case described in "Technisch Rapport Voorland Zettingsvloeiing"

Description

The example given in "Annex A - Case Study" of the Deltares report 1200503-The example given in "Annex A - Case Study" of the Deltares report 1200503-001-GEO-0004 "Concept Technisch Rapport Voorland Zettingsvloeiing" of G.A. van den Ham & Co is used.
In this example, both global and detailed checks are completed on the basis of a (fictitious) dike section, which with regard to geometry and soil structure is typical of the Southwest Delta.
The dike has a height of NAP+5 m, a crest width of 3 m and a slope of 1:3.
The foreshore begins to imaginary toe of the dike at an elevation of NAP and is 60 m wide. The toe of the trench is NAP-15 m and has a slope of 1:6. The dike section is 800 m long. The phreatic level is at NAP-2 m.
The soil profile is as follows:

...

Benchmark results

According to the by hand calculation, the Global check fails and the Advanced check passes.

D-FLOW SLIDE results

D-FLOW SLIDE results differ from the results by hand for the Detailed check, as show in the table below.

Group 3: Benchmarks from spreadsheets

...

Benchmark results

According to the by hand calculation, the Global check fails and the Advanced check passes.

D-FLOW SLIDE results

D-FLOW SLIDE results differ from the results by hand for the Detailed check, as show in the table below.

Group 3: Benchmarks from spreadsheets

This section contains tests that are missing in the other groups, for example for the CUR-113 method.

Group 4: Benchmarks generated by the program itself

This section contains test for which the reference results are generated with D-FLOW SLIDE.

4.1 Test on the level indicator

Description

To check that the level indicator is correctly inputted in D-FLOW SLIDE, the results of the two following calculations should lead to the same results:

• Benchmark 4-1a uses the same input as benchmark 1-1a, refer to paragraph 1.1 above.
• Benchmark 4-1b uses the same input as benchmark 4-1a except that the Y coordinates of the geometry are shifted by -20 m so that all points have a negative Y coordinate.

4.2 Test on the units

Group 5: Benchmarks compared with other programs

5.1 Comparison with SLIQ2D (DOS and Windows) - One fully saturated layer with variable slope angle

Description

The benchmarks in this paragraph are intended to verify the advanced method by comparing D-FLOW SLIDE results with those from the older program SLIQ2D, using both DOS and Windows versions of this program.
Because of the limitations in the DOS version of SLIQ2D, only one fully saturated layer is inputted. The geometry and the material properties for each cases are given in the table below.
The original slope angle is 1:1.25 and is set to "variable" so that the program will search (for each point) for the most unfavorable slope.

...

5.2 Comparison with SLIQ2D-Windows - 2 layers partially saturated with fixed slope angle

Description

This benchmark is intended to verify the advanced method by comparing D-FLOW SLIDE results with those from the older program SLIQ2D-Windows, for a 21 m height channel composed of 2 layers where the top layer is partially saturated. The slope of the channel is fixed to 1:3.333 (i.e. Tan Alpha = 0.3).

...