...
| Case | Step 1a | Step 1c | Step 1d | Step 1e Average slope | Step 1e Breach flow | Step 1e | Global check | Detailed check | Overall result | Warning message(s) | Information message | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | No | Pass | Pass- | Warning | D50 < 200 μm in the Detailed check, Advanced check needed (a) | |||||||
| B | Yes | Yes | Fail | Fail | Fail- | Artificial foreland , Advanced check needed (b) | ||||||
| C | Yes | No | Yes | Fail | Pass- | Fail | Criteria on "steepest Steepest slope over 5 m " met, Advanced check needed (c) | |||||
| D | Yes | No | No | Yes | No | Yes | Fail | Pass- | Pass | |||
| E | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Fail | Pass- | Warning | D50 < 200 μm in the Detailed check, Advanced check needed(a) Very fine sand (d) | ||
| F | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Fail | Fail | Fail - | D50 < 200 μm in the Detailed check, Advanced check needed(a) Very fine sand (d) | ||
| G | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | PassPass | - | Pass | |||
| H | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | Pass | Fail- | Warning | Global passes but Detailed fails, check input | ||
| I | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | Pass | Not available | Pass | |||
| J | Yes | No | No | Yes | No | Yes | Fail | Not available | Not available |
For case A, the same input as benchmark 1-1 (see group 1) is used except:
a D50 < 200 μm in the Detailed check, Advanced check needed.
b The criteria on "steepest slope over 5 m" is met, Advanced check needed.
c Artificial foreland, Advanced check needed.
d The selected sand type is "Very fine" so the breach flow check in step 1e could not be performed, Advanced check needed.
For case A, the same input as benchmark 1-1 (see group 1) is used except:
- for the distribution of the stochastic parameters of the Detailed check (LogNormal instead of Deterministic/Normal)
- for the distribution of the stochastic parameters of the Detailed check (LogNormal instead of Deterministic/Normal)
- for the surface line (the length of the foreland is increased to 160 m instead of 60 m)
- a "Distance influence zone" of 10 m is used.
...
- for the distribution of the stochastic parameters of the Detailed check (LogNormal instead of Deterministic/Normal)
- for the channel slope which is 1: 5 5 instead of 1:6
For case F, the same input as benchmark 1-1 (see group 1) is used except:
- for the distribution of the stochastic parameters of the Detailed check (LogNormal instead of Deterministic/Normal)
- for the channel slope which is 1: 77.1 instead of 1:6.
For case G, the same input as benchmark 1-1 (see group 1) is used except:
- for the distribution of the stochastic parameters of the Detailed check (LogNormal instead of Deterministic/Normal)
- for the channel slope which is 1: 76.1 6 instead of 1:6.
- for the grain diameters:
- for Calais sand : D50 = 230 μm (instead of 180) and D15 = 130 μm (unchanged)
- for Compacted sand : D50 = 210 μm (instead of 160) and D15 = 110 μm (unchanged)
...
- for the distribution of the stochastic parameters of the Detailed check (LogNormal instead of Deterministic/Normal)
- for the channel slope which is 1:6.6 instead of 1:6.
- for the state parameter which is equal to -0.06 instead of -0.03
- for the grain diameters:
- for Calais sand : D50 = 230 μm (instead of 180) and D15 = 130 μm (unchanged)
- for Compacted sand : D50 = 210 μm (instead of 160) and D15 = 110 μm (unchanged)
- 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.
...
XSsign > XSzv => Flow slide would not lead to damage on levee => Global check passes.
Detailed check: ( see table below for intermediary results) Probability of flood damage by liquefaction (= 0.00) < Allowable probability of failure (2.50 × 10-6) => Detailed check passes.D-Flow Slide results
Overall check: as Global and Detailed check pass, the The Overall check gives a Warning message because D50 < 200 μm , an Advanced check is therefore needed.
...
Global check - Step 1c: The foreland is artificial => Global and Detailed check fail, an Advanced check is needed.
Detailed check: ( see table below for intermediary results) Probability of flood damage by liquefaction < Allowable probability of failure => Detailed check passes.D-Flow Slide results
Overall check: as step 1c of The Overall check gives a Information message because the Global check fails, the Overall check fails whatever the Detailed check result.
Case C:
Global check - Step 1a:
...
Global check - Step 1d: The average slope over a height of at least 5 m is 1:3.901 so steeper than 1:4 => Flow slide is possible based on criterium "steepest slope over 5 m" => Global check fails.=> Global check fails.
Detailed check: see table below for D-Flow Slide resultsDetailed check: (see table below for intermediary results) Probability of flood damage by liquefaction < Allowable probability of failure => Detailed check passes.
Overall check: the Overall result fails (even if the Detailed check passes) gives a Warning because the criteria on "steepest slope over 5 m" is met, an Advanced check is therefore needed.
...
But the total slope is 1:6 so steeper than 1:7 => Flow slide is possible based on average slope => Global check fails.
Detailed check: ( see table below for intermediary results) Probability of flood damage by liquefaction < Allowable probability of failure => Detailed check passes.D-Flow Slide results
Overall check: the Overall result passesNo message.
Case E:
Global check - Step 1a:
...
And the total slope is 1:5 so steeper than 1:7 => Flow slide is possible based on average slope => Global check fails.slope => Global check fails.
Detailed check: see table below for D-Flow Slide resultsDetailed check: (see table below for intermediary results) Probability of flood damage by liquefaction < Allowable probability of failure => Detailed check passes.
Overall check: the Overall check gives a two Warning message messages because D50 < 200 μm and because the selected sand type is "Very fine", an Advanced check is therefore needed.
...
=> Flow slide is possible based on average slope => Global check fails.
Detailed check: ( see table below for intermediary results) Probability of flood damage by liquefaction < Allowable probability of failure => Detailed check passes.D-Flow Slide results
Overall check: as Detailed check passes, the The Overall check gives a two Warning message messages because D50 < 200 μm and because the selected sand type is "Very fine", an Advanced check is therefore needed.
...
Global check - Step 1e:
The slope channel is 1:76.1600, so the slope is softer than the critical (local) slope from the CUR table (not too fine sand with D50 = 230 μm and D15 = 130 μm) => Breaching is not possible.
And the total slope is 1:76.1 600 so softer than 1:7651 as (HR/24)1/3 = 1.651 with HR = 19.308 m.
=> Flow slide is not possible based on average slope => Global check passes.
Detailed check: ( see table below for intermediary results) Probability of flood damage by liquefaction < Allowable probability of failure => Detailed check passes.D-Flow Slide results
Overall check: as Global and Detailed check pass, the Overall passes. No message.
Case H:
Global check - Step 1a: Flow slide would lead to damage on levee => Go to step 1c.
...
=> Flow slide is not possible based on average slope => Global check passes.
Detailed check: (see table below for intermediary results) Probability of flood damage by liquefaction > Allowable probability of failure => Detailed check fails.
=> Global check passes.
Detailed check: see table below for D-Flow Slide results
Overall check: No message.Overall check: Global passes and Detailed checks fails, that's not logical, so a warning message is displayed in the Overall check.
Case I:
Global check : idem case H => Global check passes.
Detailed check: Results not available.
Overall check: the Global check passes and the Detailed check is not available. Therefore, the Overall check passes and no warning is given about illogical resultsNo message.
Case J:
Global check : idem case B => Global check fails.
Detailed check: Results not available.Overall check: the Global check fails and the Detailed check is not available. Therefore, the Overall result is not available, a detailed check is needed
Overall check: No message.
D-Flow Slide results
D-FLOW SLIDE results are in accordance with the results by hand as show in the tables below.
...
| Benchmark | D-FLOW SLIDE | Relative error | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Step 1a: Would flow slide lead to damage on levee? Marge [m] Slope [1:xxx] Assessment level [m + NAP] |
No 30.000 15.000 -10.000 |
No 30.000 15.000 -10.000 |
OK 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % | ||
| Step 1c: Artificially underwater installed and non-compacted sandy foreshore? | No | No | OK | ||
Step 1d: Flow slide possible based on criteria "steepest slope aver 5m" ? Average slope over a height of at least 5 m [1:xxx] |
No 6 |
No 6 |
OK 0.00 % | ||
Step 1e: Flow slide possible based on average geometry only? Total inclination of the channel slope [1:xxx] Is breaching possible? |
Yes 6 Yes |
Yes 6 Yes |
OK 0.00 % OK | ||
Result of the Global check | Pass | Pass | OK | ||
| Fictive channel depth Hr [m] | 19.087 | 19.087 | 0.00 % | ||
| Fictive slope cotan αr [-] | 23.000 | 23.000 | 0.00 % | ||
| Max. allowable retrogression length Lallowable [m] | 150.000 | 150.000 | 0.00% | ||
| Probability of occurence P(ZV) [/km/year] | 23.92 × 66 × 10-72 | 3.92 × 66 × 10-7 | 0.00 % | ||
| Reliability index critical length β | - | 39.999 | - | ||
| Probability P(L > Lallowable) [/year] | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 % | ||
| Probability of flood damage by liquefaction P(falen|ZV) [/year] | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 % | ||
| Allowable probability of failure [/year] | 2.50 × 10-6 | 2.50 × 10-6 | 0.00 % | ||
Result of the Detailed check | Pass | Pass | OK | ||
| 0.00 % | Overall result | Warning | Warning | OK |
Results of benchmark 3-1 for case B:
| Benchmark | D-FLOW SLIDE | Relative error | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Step 1a: Would flow slide lead to damage on levee? Marge [m] Slope [1:xxx] Assessment level [m + NAP] |
Yes 30.000 15.000 -10.000 |
Yes 30.000 15.000 -10.000 |
OK 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % | |||
| Step 1c: Artificially underwater installed and non-compacted sandy foreshore? | Yes | Yes | OK | |||
Step 1d: Flow slide possible based on criteria "steepest slope aver 5m" ? Average slope over a height of at least 5 m [1:xxx] |
No 6 |
No 6 |
OK 0.00 % | |||
Step 1e: Flow slide possible based on average geometry only? Total inclination of the channel slope [1:xxx] Is breaching possible? |
Yes 6 Yes |
Yes 6 Yes |
OK 0.00 % OK | |||
Result of the Global check | Fail | Fail | OK | |||
| Fictive channel depth Hr [m] | 21.571 | 21.571 | 0.00 % | |||
| Fictive slope cotan αr | 10.5 | 10.5 | 0.00 % | |||
| Max. allowable retrogression length Lallowable [m] | 60 | 60 | 0.00 % | |||
| Probability of preventing a liquefaction P(ZV) [/km/year] | 34.95 × 94 × 10-7 | 34.95 94 × 10-7 | 0.00 % | |||
| Reliability index β | - | 1.712 | - | |||
| P(L > Lallowable) [/year] | 4.34 × 10-2 | 4.34 × 10-2 | 0.23 00 % | |||
| Probability of flood damage by liquefaction P(falen|ZV) [/year] | 12.72× 15× 10-8 | 1.72 × 10-8 | 0.00 % | |||
| Allowable probability of failure [/year] | 2.50 × 10-6 | 2.50 × 10-6 | 0.00 % | |||
Result of the Detailed check | Pass | Pass | OK | |||
| 2.15 × 10-8 | 0.00 % | Overall result | Fail | Fail | OK |
Results of benchmark 3-1 for case C:
| Benchmark | D-FLOW SLIDE | Relative error | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Step 1a: Would flow slide lead to damage on levee? Marge [m] Slope [1:xxx] Assessment level [m + NAP] |
Yes 28.016 15.000 -10.331 |
Yes 28.016 15.000 -10.331 |
OK 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % | ||||||||
| Step 1c: Artificially underwater installed and non-compacted sandy foreshore? | No | No | OK | ||||||||
Step 1d: Flow slide possible based on criteria "steepest slope aver 5m" ? Average slope over a height of at least 5 m [1:xxx] |
Yes 3.901 |
Yes 3.901 |
OK 0.00 % | ||||||||
Step 1e: Flow slide possible based on average geometry only? Total inclination of the channel slope [1:xxx] Is breaching possible? |
Yes 7.395 Yes |
Yes 7.395 Yes |
OK 0.00 % OK | ||||||||
Result of the Global check | Fail | Fail | OK | ||||||||
| Fictive channel depth Hr [m] | 23.791 | 23.791 | 0.00 % | ||||||||
| Fictive slope cotan αr | 8.413 | 8.413 | 0.00 % | ||||||||
| Max. allowable retrogression length Lallowable [m] | 60 | 60 | 0.00 % | ||||||||
| Probability of preventing a liquefaction P(ZV) [/km/year] | 57.63 04 × 10-85 | 7.63 04 × 10-8 | 0.00 % | ||||||||
| Reliability index β | --1 | 39.334999 | - | ||||||||
| P(L > Lallowable) | 9.09 × 10-1 | [/year] | 0 | 09.09 × 10-1 | 0.00 % | ||||||
| Probability of flood damage by liquefaction P(falen|ZV) [/year] | 5.12 × 10-8 | 5.12 × 10-8 | 0.00 % | Allowable probability of failure [/year] | 2.50 × 10-6 | 0 2.50 × 10-6 | 0.00 %Result of the Detailed check | Pass | Pass | OK | |
| Overall result | Fail | Fail | OK |
Results of benchmark 3-1 for case D:
| Benchmark | D-FLOW SLIDE | Relative error | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Step 1a: Would flow slide lead to damage on levee? Marge [m] Slope [1:xxx] Assessment level [m + NAP] |
Yes 30.000 15.000 -10.000 |
Yes 30.000 15.000 -10.000 |
OK 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % | ||||
| Step 1c: Artificially underwater installed and non-compacted sandy foreshore? | No | No | OK | ||||
Step 1d: Flow slide possible based on criteria "steepest slope aver 5m" ? Average slope over a height of at least 5 m [1:xxx] |
No 6 |
No 6 |
OK 0.00 % | ||||
Step 1e: Flow slide possible based on average geometry only? Total inclination of the channel slope [1:xxx] Is breaching possible? |
Yes 6 No |
Yes 6 No |
OK 0.00 % OK | ||||
Result of the Global check | Fail | Fail | OK | ||||
| Fictive channel depth Hr [m] | 21.571 | 2521.571 | 0.00 % | ||||
| Fictive slope cotan αr | 10.500 | 10.500 | 0.00 % | ||||
| Max. allowable retrogression length Lallowable [m] | 60 | 60 | 0.00 % | ||||
| Probability of preventing a liquefaction P(ZV) [/km/year] | 34.92 90 × 10-73 | 4.92 × 90 × 10-7 | 0.00 % | ||||
| Reliability index β | - | 1.712 | - | ||||
| P(L > Lallowable) [/year] | 4.34 × 10-2 | 4.34 × 10-2 | 0.00 % | ||||
| Probability of flood damage by liquefaction P(falen|ZV) [/year] | 12.70 × 13 × 10-8 | 12.70 13 × 10-8 | 0.00 % | Allowable probability of failure [/year] | 2.50 × 10-6 | 2.50 × 10-6 | 0.00 % |
Result of the Detailed check | Pass | Pass | OK | ||||
| Overall result | Pass | Pass | OK |
Results of benchmark 3-1 for case E:
| Benchmark | D-FLOW SLIDE | Relative error | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Step 1a: Would flow slide lead to damage on levee? Marge [m] Slope [1:xxx] Assessment level [m + NAP] |
Yes 3036.000 15.000 -109.000 |
Yes 3036.000 15.000 -109.000 |
OK 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % | |||||||
| Step 1c: Artificially underwater installed and non-compacted sandy foreshore? | No | No | OK | |||||||
Step 1d: Flow slide possible based on criteria "steepest slope aver 5m" ? Average slope over a height of at least 5 m [1:xxx] |
No 5.000 |
No 5.000 |
OK 0.00 % | |||||||
Step 1e: Flow slide possible based on average geometry only? Total inclination of the channel slope [1:xxx] Is breaching possible? |
Yes 5.000 Yes |
Yes 5.000 Yes |
OK 0.00 % OK | |||||||
Result of the Global check | Fail | Fail | OK | |||||||
| Fictive channel depth Hr [m] | 25.143 | 25.143 | 0.00 % | |||||||
| Fictive slope cotan αr | 14 | 14 | 0.00 % | |||||||
| Max. allowable retrogression length Lallowable [m] | 60 | 60 | 0.00 % | |||||||
| Probability of preventing a liquefaction P(ZV) [/km/year] | 1.44 80 × 10-6 | 1.44 80 × 10-6 | 0.00 % | |||||||
| Reliability index β | -0 | 1.234 | - | |||||||
| P(L > Lallowable) [/year] | 51.00 08 × 10-15 | 1.00 08 × 10-1 | 0.23 00 % | |||||||
| Probability of flood damage by liquefaction P(falen|ZV) [/year] | 7.18 × 10-7 | 7.18 × 10-7 | 0.18 % | Allowable probability of failure [/year] | 2.50 1.95 × 10-67 2 | 1.50 95 × 10-67 | 0.00 %Result of the Detailed check | Pass | Pass | OK |
| Overall result | Warning | Warning | OK |
Results of benchmark 3-1 for case F:
| Benchmark | D-FLOW SLIDE | Relative error | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Step 1a: Would flow slide lead to damage on levee? Marge [m] Slope [1:xxx] Assessment level [m + NAP] |
Yes 25.352360 15.000 -10.775 |
Yes 25.352360 15.000 -10.775 |
OK 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % | ||||
| Step 1c: Artificially underwater installed and non-compacted sandy foreshore? | No | No | OK | ||||
Step 1d: Flow slide possible based on criteria "steepest slope aver 5m" ? Average slope over a height of at least 5 m [1:xxx] |
No 7.099094 |
No 7.100096 |
OK 0.01 03 % | ||||
Step 1e: Flow slide possible based on average geometry only? Total inclination of the channel slope [1:xxx] Is breaching possible? |
Yes 7.100 Yes |
Yes 7.100 Yes |
OK 0.00 % OK | ||||
Result of the Global check | Fail | Fail | OK | ||||
| Fictive channel depth Hr [m] | 25.874864 | 25.874864 | 0.00 % | ||||
| Fictive slope cotan αr | 6.641646 | 6.641646 | 0.00 % | ||||
| Max. allowable retrogression length Lallowable [m] | 60 | 60 | 0.00 % | ||||
| Probability of preventing a liquefaction P(ZV) [/km/year] | 23.67 33 × 10-72 | 3.67 33 × 10-7 | 0.00 % | ||||
| Reliability index β | - | 039.974999 | - | ||||
| P(L > Lallowable) | 1.65 × 10-1 | [/year] | 0 | 01.65 × 10-1 | 0.10 00 % | ||
| Probability of flood damage by liquefaction P(falen|ZV) [/year] | 4.40 × 10-8 | 4.40 × 10-80 | 0.00 % | Allowable probability of failure [/year] | 2.50 × 10-6 | 2.50 × 10-6 | 0.00 % |
Result of the Detailed check | Pass | Pass | OK | ||||
| Overall result | Warning | Warning | OK |
Results of benchmark 3-1 for case G:
| Benchmark | D-FLOW SLIDE | Relative error | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Step 1a: Would flow slide lead to damage on levee? Marge [m] Slope [1:xxx] Assessment level [m + NAP] |
Yes 2527.352280 15.000 -10.775453 |
Yes 2527.352280 15.000 -10.775453 |
OK 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % | ||||||
| Step 1c: Artificially underwater installed and non-compacted sandy foreshore? | No | No | OK | ||||||
Step 1d: Flow slide possible based on criteria "steepest slope aver 5m" ? Average slope over a height of at least 5 m [1:xxx] |
No 76.099595 |
No 76.100596 |
OK 0.01 02 % | ||||||
Step 1e: Flow slide possible based on average geometry only? Total inclination of the channel slope [1:xxx] Is breaching possible? |
No 76.100600 No |
No 76.100600 No |
OK 0.00 % OK | ||||||
Result of the Global check | Pass | Pass | OK | ||||||
| Fictive channel depth Hr [m] | 2519.87430825 | 19.874308 | 0.00 % | ||||||
| Fictive slope cotan αr | 610.6415006 | 10.641500 | 0.00 % | ||||||
| Max. allowable retrogression length Lallowable [m] | 60 | 60 | 0.00 % | ||||||
| Probability of preventing a liquefaction P(ZV) [/km/year] | 2.65 30 × 10-7 | 2.65 31 × 10-7 | 0.00 43 % | ||||||
| Reliability index β | - | 039.974999 | - | ||||||
| P(L > Lallowable) | 1.65 × 10-1 | 1.65 × 10-1 | 0.00 % | Probability of flood damage by liquefaction P(falen|ZV) [/year] | 4.38 × 10-8 | 0 | 04.38 × 10-8 | 0.00 % | |
| Allowable probability of failure Probability of flood damage by liquefaction P(falen|ZV) [/year] | 2.50 × 10-6 | 0 | 0 2.50 × 10-6 | 0.00 % | |||||
Result of the Detailed check | Pass | Pass | OK | ||||||
| Overall result | Pass | Pass | OK |
Results of benchmark 3-1 for case H:
| Benchmark | D-FLOW SLIDE | Relative error | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Step 1a: Would flow slide lead to damage on levee? Marge [m] Slope [1:xxx] Assessment level [m + NAP] |
Yes 2527.352280 15.000 -10.775453 |
Yes 2527.352280 15.000 -10.775453 |
OK 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % | |||||
| Step 1c: Artificially underwater installed and non-compacted sandy foreshore? | No | No | OK | |||||
Step 1d: Flow slide possible based on criteria "steepest slope aver 5m" ? Average slope over a height of at least 5 m [1:xxx] |
No 76.099596 |
No 76.100596 |
OK 0.01 02 % | |||||
Step 1e: Flow slide possible based on average geometry only? Total inclination of the channel slope [1:xxx] Is breaching possible? |
No 76.100600 No |
No 76.100600 No |
OK 0.00 % OK | |||||
Result of the Global check | Pass | Pass | OK | |||||
| Fictive channel depth Hr [m] | 2519.87403825 | 19.874038 | 0.00 % | |||||
| Fictive slope cotan αr | 610.6415006 | 10.641500 | 0.00 % | |||||
| Max. allowable retrogression length Lallowable [m] | 60 | 60 | 0.00 % | |||||
| Probability of preventing a liquefaction P(ZV) [/km/year] | 65.66 80 × 10-46 | 5.66 80 × 10-4 | 0.00 % | |||||
| Reliability index β | - | 039.974999 | - | |||||
| P(L > Lallowable) | 1.65 × 10-1 | [/year] | 0 | 01.65 × 10-1 | 0.00 % | |||
| Probability of flood damage by liquefaction P(falen|ZV) [/year] | 1.10 × 10-4 | 1.10 × 10-4 | 0.00 % | Allowable probability of failure ) [/year] | 2.50 × 10-7 | 0 | 0 2.50 × 10-7 | 0.00 % |
Result of the Detailed check | Fail | Fail | OK | |||||
| Overall result | Warning | Warning | OK |
Results of benchmark 3-1 for case I:
| Benchmark | D-FLOW SLIDE | Relative error |
|---|---|---|---|
Step 1a: Would flow slide lead to damage on levee? Marge [m] Slope [1:xxx] Assessment level [m + NAP] |
Yes 2527.352280 15.000 -10.775453 |
Yes 2527.352280 15.000 -10.775453 |
OK 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % |
| Step 1c: Artificially underwater installed and non-compacted sandy foreshore? | No | No | OK |
Step 1d: Flow slide possible based on criteria "steepest slope aver 5m" ? Average slope over a height of at least 5 m [1:xxx] |
No 76.099595 |
No 76.100596 |
OK 0.01 % |
Step 1e: Flow slide possible based on average geometry only? Total inclination of the channel slope [1:xxx] Is breaching possible? |
No 76.100600 No |
No 76.100600 No |
OK 0.00 % OK |
Result of the Global check | Pass | Pass | OK |
Result of the Detailed check | Not available | Not available | OK |
| Overall result | Pass | Pass | OK |
Results of benchmark 3-1 for case J:
| Benchmark | D-FLOW SLIDE | Relative error | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Step 1a: Would flow slide lead to damage on levee? Marge [m] Slope [1:xxx] Assessment level [m + NAP] |
Yes 30.000 15.000 -10.000 |
Yes 30.000 15.000 -10.000 |
OK 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % | ||||
| Step 1c: Artificially underwater installed and non-compacted sandy foreshore? | Yes | Yes | OK | ||||
Step 1d: Flow slide possible based on criteria "steepest slope aver 5m" ? Average slope over a height of at least 5 m [1:xxx] |
No 6 |
No 6 |
OK 0.00 % | ||||
Step 1e: Flow slide possible based on average geometry only? Total inclination of the channel slope [1:xxx] Is breaching possible? |
Yes 6 Yes |
Yes 6 Yes |
OK 0.00 % OK | ||||
Result of the Global check | Fail | Fail | OK | ||||
Result of the Detailed check | Not available | Not available | OK | Overall result | Fail | Fail | OK |