First, it would have to be plentiful. Levies require a great deal of material due to the lengths they have to be in order to surrond the area they have to protect.
It would also have to be an affordable material. Building a levee that costs more than the value of the land and buildings it protects defeats the purpose. For the same reasons, it would have to be cheap to use as a construction material.
It does not need to be impervious to water. A levee is designed to hold MOST of the water back temporarily. Pumps should be used to remove the water that builds up behind the levees from runoff within the protected area, and a properly constructed and maintained earthen levee doesn't allow enough water to flow through to overwelm properly designed pumping systems. To hold all of the water back, or to hold water for extended periods, much more costly dikes or dams need to be used.
It must also be able to be repaired or improved quickly and easily with a minimum of equipment and with materials at hand during a flood. This usually means sandbags.
Basically I would use sand, clay, and similar materials just like the Corps of Engineers has been doing effectively on the Mississippi for a long time now. If properly built and maintained they don't fail unless they aren't built hgh enough for the flood. Of course, any material will fail if it isn't built right, too. Even in New Orleans, the levees I heard the root cause of failure on gave way because the ground under them gave out, not because the levee itself was weak. Even a solid wall of titanium 100 feet high won't do any good if you let the water find a way under it.
2007-03-05 17:43:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by Now and Then Comes a Thought 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hi. A stable, dense, water and wind resistant material with good strength. My opinion.
2007-03-06 00:45:57
·
answer #2
·
answered by Cirric 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Cohesiveness, you want the stuff to stay put in a flood.
2007-03-06 01:11:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by Professor Kitty 6
·
0⤊
0⤋