Temporary Flood Protection Research at U of M. Title of presentation. Faculty of Engineering. Shawn Clark, Ph.D., P.Eng.

Temporary Flood Protection Research at U of M Shawn Clark, Ph.D., P.Eng. Contributors: James Blatz, Steven Harms, Raymond Offman, Kevin Sagan Title of presentation umanitoba.ca Faculty of Engineering

Photo by Ken Skaftfeld, P.Eng..Before

Photo by Ken Skaftfeld, P.Eng. And After

Photo by Ken Skaftfeld, P.Eng.

Volunteer Sanbag Dikes

Limited physical evidence regarding sandbag dike performance leading to many questions about risks (height limit?). Even though not a permanent structure, little doubt sandbags will be needed in future events. Need QUANTITATIVE data!

Dike Interface Properties PES on WPP PES on PES WPP on WPP WPP on Sand PES on Sod WPP on SOD

Physical Experiments

Large-Scale Direct Shear Box 1m

Normal vs Shear Stress Summary of all Interfaces Tested in Large-Scale Shear Apparatus 140 Shear Stress (kpa) 120 100 80 60 40 PES on PES PES on WSFPP PES on Sod WSFPP on WSFPP WSFPP on Sod RMC Sand on WSFPP Sandbags on Sod Sandbags on Sandbags 20 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Normal Stress (kpa)

Preparation for 8 Test

City of Winnipeg Design Guideline 1 2 2V:1H

8 Dike Near Overtopping

Densification by Wetting 9

Failure of Dike Without Poly

Impact of Volunteer Construction

6 Baseline Research Dike

6 Volunteer Dike

Wave resistance tests HRTF wave flume ( 30 m long, 1.5 wide, 1.5 high) 5 ft dike, City of Wpg. template

4 hr wave test duration Varied the wave height H s Sandbags from City of Winnipeg Stockpile Woven slit film polypropylene bags (WSFPP) Sand d 50 = 0.66 mm 0.375 mm apparent opening size 6 mil polyethylene sheet as waterproof membrane

Sandbad test video clips Impact Clip 1 Impact Clip 2 Wave Clip 1 Wave Clip 2 Wave Clip 3 Wave Clip 4

1.6 1.4 Before After H s = 0.45 m Elevation (m) 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 1000.5 1001.0 1001.5 1002.0 1002.5 1003.0 Dike Location Along Wave Flume (m)

1.6 1.4 Before After H s = 0.55 m Elevation (m) 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 1000.5 1001.0 1001.5 1002.0 1002.5 1003.0 Dike Location Along Wave Flume (m)

Deltalok GTX sanbags Non-woven geotextile 0.300 mm apparent opening size 6 mil polyethylene sheet as waterproof membrane

No Time for Sandbags Retained to provide testing / deployment of alternative flood protection methods / products. Testing and verification in the field. Employed four new products: 1. HESCO Barrier System 2. Tiger Dams 3. MuscleWall 4. ABC Waterbloc

HESCO Barriers

Tiger Dams

Muscle Wall

ABC Waterbloc

Syn-Tex Wave Breaker Sand-filled compartments Made of a woven polypropylene geotextile fabric Cover to protect and retain fill

Standardized Testing Protocol (USACE) 1. Constructability evaluation 2. Hydrostatic testing 3. Wave-induced hydrodynamic load testing 4. Overtopping 5. Debris impact test

Syn-Tex Wave Breaker Installation

Hydrostatic Loading virtually no movement recorded

Seepage Summary Water Level (inches) 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Water Level Aug 28 Seepage Rates Aug 29 Seepage Rates Aug 23 Seepage Rates Aug 27 Seepage Rates 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 Change in Time (days) 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 Seepage Rate (cfs)

Hydrodynamic Loading

Overtopping Test

Impact Testing 12 foot long hydro poles used 12 and 17 diameters 5 mph impact velocity 20 degree impact angle

Conclusions 1. Sand-filled flood protection products densify after first loading. 2. Volunteer sandbags need to be closely monitored. 3. The performance of typical sandbags decreases with wave induced loading Pressure fluctuations cause fill loss, which leads to compromised front face of the dike A compromised poly layer leads to minimal flood protection 4. Non-woven geotextile bags provide improved perfomance

Conclusions 1. Experience is essential for Wave Breaker installation 2. Using the steel X-frame for installation is more effective than the PVC frame 4. The Wave Breakers are very stable although the product settles as it saturates 5. Seepage occurs both at the bag/wall interface and through the product Maximum seepage rate observed was 1gpm/ft 6. Wave Breaker material maintains the product s fill

Future Work 1. Perform testing in a stacked configuration 2. Isolate seepage rates at bag/wall interface and through product 3. Test product on a slope

Thank You!

Title Faculty of presentation of Engineering umanitoba.ca

Major Task Minor Task Duration of Minor Task Manpower Used Approximate Man-Hours Duration of Major Task Preparing product for installation Unload product and installation frame from delivery truck Remove product from delivery packaging 15 min 2 people 0.5 10 min 2 people 0.3 25 min Orient product in appropriate test configuration Cut wall 1 to appropriate length and place in appropriate location 20 min 3 people 1 Connect walls 1 and 2 25 min 4 people 1.7 50 min Lay out walls 2 and 3 in appropriate location 5 min 2 people 0.2 Fill first cell with sand 10 min 6 people 1 Fill subsequent cells with sand Varied greatly Varied from 3-6 people 17 Fill product with sand Move PVC frame between cells (average) Move X-frame between cells (average) 3 min Varied from 2-4 people 0.15 3 min 2-3 people 0.15 6.5h Deliberation regarding filling technique and order Varied greatly 1-3 people 4 Cover product to complete installation Fill sandbags to weigh down cover and poly Lay out poly and get small sandbags into position 1 hr 2 people 2 1.5 hr 3-4 people 4.5 2.5h T O T A L 32.5 hours 9.25 hours

Importance of Construction Quality 6' Sandbag Dike, August 6, Extensometer Summary 0.83m above base of Dike 6' Sandbag Dike, August 21, Extensometer Summary 0.83m above base of Dike 125 100 500-1 500-2 500-4 500-5 500-6 Water Behind Dike 1.8 1.5 125 100 500-1 500-2 500-4 500-5 500-6 Water Behind Dike 1.8 1.5 Displacement (mm) 75 50 1.2 0.9 0.6 Water Depth (m) Displacement (mm) 75 50 1.2 0.9 0.6 Water Depth (m) 25 0.3 25 0.3 0 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 Time (min) 0 0.0 0 25 50 75 Time (min) BASELINE VOLUNTEER

Sensor Locations