Submitted:
09 June 2023
Posted:
09 June 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Background
2.1. Hydraulic conductivity
2.2. Liquefaction
2.3. Electromagnetic Waves
2.3.1. EM Waves Impact on Soil Media
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Experimental Setup and Testing Procedures
3.1.1. Seepage Measurements
3.1.2. RF Wave Setup
3.1.3. Electric Field Mapping
3.2. Three-dimensional Numerical Forward Model of Seepage simulated by RF waves
3.2.1. Unstimulated Seepage
3.2.2. RF-stimulated Seepage
4. Results
4.1. Electric-Field Measurement and Validation of Numerical Simulation
3.3. Hydraulic Conductivity Tests
4.3. Electric-Field
4.3.1. Measurement and Comparison
4.4. Seepage Flow Numerical Simulation
5. Conclusions
6. Patents
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
References
- American Standard and Testing Materials (ASTM). ASTM D2434: Standard test methods for measurement of hydraulic conductivity of coarse-grained soils. In ASTM International, 2022, 6p.,.
- Kramer, S. L. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering. Pearson, 2013.
- Martin, J. R., Olgun, C.G., Mitchell, J.K., and Durgunoglu, H.T. High-Modulus Columns for Liquefaction Mitigation. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. 2004, Volume 130, Issue 6, pp. 561. [CrossRef]
- Cole, G. L., Rajesh P.D., and Fred M.T. Building Pounding Damage Observed in the 2011 Christchurch Earthquake. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2012, Volume 41, Issue 5, pp. 893–913. [CrossRef]
- Sharp, M. K., Dobry, R., and Abdoun, T. Liquefaction Centrifuge Modeling of Sands of Different Permeability. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. 2004, Volume 129, Issue 12, 9p. [CrossRef]
- Ganainy, H.E., Abdoun, T., and Dobry, R. Centrifuge Study of the Effect of Permeability and Other Soil Properties on the Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading of Dense Sand.” In Proceedings of GeoCongress, Oakland, CA, USA, 2012.
- Farid, A., Najafi, A., Browning, J., and Barney Smith, E. Electromagnetic Waves’ Effect on Airflow during Air Sparging. Elsevier Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 2019, Volume 220, pp. 49-58. [CrossRef]
- Azad, S., Farid, A., and Browning, J. Consequence of EM stimulation on Hydraulic Conductivity of a Bentonite Clayey Sample. Environmental Geotechnics Journal, 2015, Volume 2, Issue 4, pp. 211-223, August.
- Ikezoe, Y., Hirota, N., Nakagawa, J., Kitazawa, K. Making Water Levitate. Nature, 1998, Volume 393, Issue 6687, pp. 749. [CrossRef]
- Azad, S; Najafi, A.; Farid, A.; Browning, J.; Barney Smith, E. “Study of Mechanisms Governing Electromagnetic Alteration of Hydraulic Conductivity of Soils.” In Geotechnical Special Publication, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Arlington, VA, USA. 2014, pp. 1693–1702. [CrossRef]
- Hubbert, M. Darcy’s law and the field equations of the flow of underground fluids. International Association of Scientific Hydrology. Bulletin. 1957, pp. 23-59. [CrossRef]
- Fetter, C.W. Applied Hydrogeology. 4th ed. Pearson, 2001.
- Hazirbaba, K. and Rathje. E.M. 2009. Pore Pressure Generation of Silty Sands due to Induced Cyclic Shear Strains. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. 2009, Volume 135, Issue 12. [CrossRef]
- Santamarina, J. Carlos, et al. Electromagnetism: Soils and Waves. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, USA, 2001, pp. 303–327.
- Sun, W., Xu, X., Xu, C. Effects of H2O Dipole Polarization on Ice Formation Process under Electrostatic Field. Journal of Cryobiology, 2007, Volume 56, Issue 1, pp. 93-99.
- Vaid, Y. P. and Negussey, D., Preparation of Reconstituted Sand Specimens. Advanced triaxial testing of soil and rock, ASTM STP 977, Philadelphia, 1988, pp. 405-417.
- Farid, A., Najafi, A.*, Browning, J., & Barney Smith, E. Electromagnetic Waves’ Effect on Airflow during Air Sparging. Elsevier Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 2019, Vol. 220, pp. 49-58.
- Azad, S. Electromagnetic alteration of hydraulic conductivity of soils. MS thesis, Boise State University. 2013.
- Azad, M. Analysis of electromagnetic stimulation of transport in water for geoenvironmental applications. MS Thesis, Boise State University. 2012.
















| Potters Designation | U.S. Sieve Number | Maximum Size (in.) | Minimum Size (in.) | Maximum Size (µm) | Minimum Size (µm) | Minimum % of Round Beads |
| Class A | 20-30 | 0.0331 | 0.0234 | 850 | 600 | 65 |
| Power (Watts) | Average of Unstimulated Hydraulic Conductivity Measured Before RF-stimulation, k (cm/s) | RF-stimulated Hydraulic Conductivity, Peak Value, k’ (cm/s) | Percent Change (%) |
| 10 | 1.3942 ×10-2 | 1.452×10-2 | (+) 4.190% |
| 25 | 1.3911×10-2 | 1.482×10-2 | (+) 6.864% |
| 40 | 1.3923×10-2 | 1.514 ×10-2 | (+) 8.774% |
| RF-Power (Watts) | Average of Measured Unstimulated Hydraulic Conductivity Values, k (cm/s) | RF-stimulated Hydraulic Conductivity, Peak Value, k’ (cm/s) | Percent Change (%) |
| 10 | 0.7933 Í10-2 | 0.881Í10-2 | (+) 11.091% |
| 25 | 0.7932Í10-2 | 0.915Í10-2 | (+) 15.287% |
| 40 | 0.7928Í10-2 | 0.994 Í10-2 | (+) 25.386% |
| RF Input Power (Watts) | (Experimental) | Slope () (Numerical Stimulation) | (Numerical value based on optimized k’) | Cost Function |
| 0 | 9.34Í10-6 | None | 9.23Í10-6 | 1.18% |
| 10 | 10.39Í10-6 | 3.65Í10-8 | 10.11Í10-6 | 2.77% |
| 25 | 10.78Í10-6 | 3.25Í10-8 | 10.52Í10-6 | 2.47% |
| 40 | 11.71Í10-6 | 3.25Í10-8 | 11.42Í10-6 | 2.54% |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).