This paper critically compares the use of laboratory tests against in situ tests combined with numerical seepage modeling to determine the hydraulic conductivity of natural soil deposits. Laboratory determination of hydraulic conductivity used the constant head permeability and oedometer tests on undisturbed Shelby tube and block soil samples. The auger hole method and Guelph permeameter tests were performed in the field. Groundwater table elevations in natural soil deposits with different hydraulic conductivity values were predicted using finite element seepage modeling and compared with field measurements to assess the various test results. Hydraulic conductivity values obtained by the auger hole method provide predictions that best match the groundwater table’s observed location at the field site. This observation indicates that hydraulic conductivity determined by the in situ test represents the actual conditions in the field better than that determined in a laboratory setting. The differences between the laboratory and in situ hydraulic conductivity values can be attributed to factors such as sample disturbance, soil anisotropy, fissures and cracks, and soil structure in addition to the conceptual and procedural differences in testing methods and effects of sample size.

The increasing number of extreme climate events has impacted the operation of reservoirs, resulting in drastic changes in flow releases from reservoirs. Consequently, downstream riverbanks have experienced more rapid and frequent changes of the river water surface elevation (WSE). These changes in the WSE affect pore water pressures in riverbanks, directly influencing slope stability. This study presents an analysis of seepage and slope stability for riverbanks under the influence of steady-state, drawdown, and peaking operations of the Roanoke Rapids Hydropower dam on the lower Roanoke River, North Carolina, USA. Although the riverbanks were found to be stable under all the discharge conditions considered, which indicates that normal operations of the reservoir have no adverse effects on riverbank stability, the factor of safety decreases as the WSE decreases. When the role of fluvial erosion is considered, riverbank stability is found to reduce. Drawdown and fluctuation also decrease the safety factor, though the rate of the decrease depends more on the hydraulic conductivity of the soils rather than the discharge pattern.