Large-Scale Channel Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6460) (Modified procedure used for vegetated channel tests)
|
|
- Ada Harper
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Large-Scale Channel Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6460) (Modified procedure used for vegetated channel tests) of East Coast Erosion Blanket ECP-3 Permanent Turf Reinforcement Mats over Loam December 2011 Submitted to: AASHTO/NTPEP 444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 249 Washington, D.C Attn: Evan Rothblatt, NTPEP erothblatt@aashto.org Submitted by: TRI/Environmental, Inc Bee Caves Road Austin, TX C. Joel Sprague Project Manager
2 December 12, 2011 Mr. Evan Rothblatt AASHTO/NTPEP 444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 249 Washington, D.C Subject: Channel Testing over Loam of East Coast Erosion Blanket s ECP-3, Triple Net Polymer Fiber Matting manufactured in Bernville, PA. Dear Mr. Rothblatt: This letter report presents the results for large-scale channel erosion tests performed on ECP-3, Triple Net Polymer Fiber Matting, over Loam. Included are data developed for target hydraulic shears ranging from 0.5 to 3+ psf (0.02 to kpa) for the unvegetated condition and from 1 to 13+ psf (0.04 to kpa) for the vegetated condition. All testing work was performed in general accordance with the ASTM D 6460, Standard Test Method for Determination of Rolled Erosion Control Product (RECP) Performance in Protecting Earthen Channels from Stormwater-Induced Erosion. The procedure was modified to use only single replicates when testing vegetated channels. Generated results were used to develop the following permissible or limiting shear (τ limit ) and limiting velocity (V limit ) for the tested material: ECP-3, Triple Net Polymer Fiber Matting & 4.5 staples/sy Product Unvegetated 6+ Week Vegetated 1+ Year Vegetated Condition Condition Condition Actual growth period, wks τ limit * 12.3* V limit * 25.0* * = ASTM D 6460 requires that three test replicates be performed using identical procedures to obtain an average threshold of performance. Thus, the results of vegetated testing, being single replicates of each condition, cannot be considered as an average threshold of performance. TRI is pleased to present this final report. Please feel free to call if we can answer any questions or provide any additional information. Sincerely, C. Joel Sprague, P.E. Senior Engineer Geosynthetics Services Division cc: Sam Allen, Jarrett Nelson - TRI
3 ECP-3, Triple Net Polymer Fiber Matting, over Loam Channel Erosion Testing December 12, 2011 Page 3 CHANNEL TESTING REPORT ECP-3, Triple Net Polymer Fiber Matting, over Loam TESTING EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURES Overview of Test and Apparatus TRI/Environmental, Inc.'s (TRI's) large-scale channel erosion testing facility is located at the Denver Downs Research Farm in Anderson, SC. Testing oversight is provided by C. Joel Sprague, P.E. The large-scale testing is performed in a rectangular flume having a 10% slope (unvegetated condition) or 20% slope (vegetated condition) using a loamy soil test section. The concentrated flow is produced by raising gates to allow gravity flow from an adjacent pond. At least four sequential, increasing flows are applied to each test section for 30 minutes (unvegetated condition) or 1 hour (vegetated condition) each to achieve a range of hydraulic shear stresses in order to define the permissible, or limiting, shear stress, τ limit, which is the shear stress necessary to cause an average of 0.5 inch of soil loss over the entire channel bottom. Testing is performed in accordance with ASTM D 6460, though the procedure was modified to use only single replicates when testing vegetated channels. Tables and graphs of shear versus soil loss are generated from the accumulated data. Rolled Erosion Control Product (RECP) The following information and index properties were determined from the supplied product. Table 1. Tested Product Information & Index Properties Product Information and Index Property / Test Units Sampled Product Product Identification - ECP-3 Manufacturer - East Coast Erosion Blanket Manufacturing Plant Location - Bernville, PA Lot number of sample A Fiber - Polypropylene Netting Openings in 0.5 x 0.5 (approx) Stitching Spacing in 1.5 (approx) Tensile Strength MD x XD (ASTM D 6818) lb/in 104 x 116 Tensile Elongation MD x XD (ASTM D 6818) % 33 x 19 Thickness (ASTM D 6525) mils 345 Light Penetration (ASTM D 6567) % cover 83.8 Specific Gravity (ASTM D 792, Method A) Net Only g/cm Mass / Unit Area (ASTM D 6475) oz/sy Test Soil The test soil used in the test plots had the following characteristics.
4 ECP-3, Triple Net Polymer Fiber Matting, over Loam Channel Erosion Testing December 12, 2011 Page 4 Table 2. TRI-Loam Characteristics Soil Characteristic Test Method Value % Gravel 0 % Sand 45 ASTM D 422 % Silt 35 % Clay 20 Liquid Limit, % 41 ASTM D 4318 Plasticity Index, % 8 Soil Classification USDA Loam Soil Classification USCS Sandy silty clay (ML-CL) Preparation of the Test Channels The initial channel soil veneer (12-inch thick minimum) is placed and compacted. Compaction is verified to be 90% (± 3%) of Proctor Standard density using ASTM D 698 (sand cone method). The test channels undergo a standard preparation procedure prior to each test. First, any rills or depressions resulting from previous testing are filled in with test soil. The soil surface is replaced to a depth of 1 inch and groomed to create a channel bottom that is level side-to-side and at a smooth slope top-to-bottom. Finally, a vibrating plate compactor is run over the renewed channel surface. If a vegetated condition is to be tested, grass seed (tall fescue) is applied to the plot at the rate of 500 seeds per square foot. The submitted erosion control product is then installed using the anchors and anchorage pattern directed by the client. Installation of Erosion Control Product in Test Channel As noted, the submitted erosion control product is installed as directed by the client. For the tests reported herein, the erosion control product was anchored using a diamond anchorage pattern consisting of 2 x 8 steel staples to create an anchorage density of approximately 4.5 anchors per square yard. Specific Test Procedure Immediately prior to testing, the initial soil surface elevation readings are made at predetermined cross-sections. The channel is then exposed to sequential 30-minute (unvegetated condition) or 1-hour (vegetated condition) flows having target hydraulic shear stresses selected to create at least three flow events below and one flow event above the shear stress level that results in a cummulative average soil loss of ½-inch. During the testing, flow depth and corresponding flow measurements are taken at the predetermined cross-section locations. Between flow events, the flow is stopped and soil surface elevation measurements are made to facilitate calculation of soil loss. The flow is then restarted at the next desired flow (shear) level. Pictures of channel flows and resulting soil loss are shown in Figures 6 thru 12.
5 ECP-3, Triple Net Polymer Fiber Matting, over Loam Channel Erosion Testing December 12, 2011 Page 5 Figure 1. Typical 10% (Unvegetated Shear) Flumes on Left; 20% Flumes on Right Figure 4. Unvegetated RECP Figure Week Vegetated Shear in 20% Flumes; Recirculation Pump in Background Figure Week Vegetated RECP Figure 3. Typical 20% Temporary Flume Set Up 1+ Year Vegetated Shear Plots Figure Year Vegetated RECP
6 ECP-3, Triple Net Polymer Fiber Matting, over Loam Channel Erosion Testing December 12, 2011 Page 6 Figure 7. Typical Flow in Unvegetated Channel Figure 10. Unvegetated Channel after Test with RECP Removed (typical) Figure 8. Typical Flow in 6+ Week Vegetated Channel Figure Week Vegetated Channel after Test (typical) Figure 9. Typical Flow in 1+ Year Vegetated Channel Figure Year Vegetated Channel after Test (typical)
7 ECP-3, Triple Net Polymer Fiber Matting, over Loam Channel Erosion Testing December 12, 2011 Page 7 TEST RESULTS Average soil loss and the associated hydraulic shear calculated from flow and depth measurements made during the testing are the principle data used to determine the performance of the product tested. This data is entered into a spreadsheet that transforms the flow depth and velocity into an hydraulic shear stress and the soil loss measurements into an average Clopper Soil Loss Index (CSLI). Measured and calculated data is summarized in Table 3. A graph of shear versus soil loss for the protected condition is shown in Figure 13. The associated velocities and time of vegetation growth are plotted in Figures 14 and 15, respectively. The graphs include the best regression line fit to the test data to facilitate a determination of the limiting shear stress, τ limit,, and limiting velocity, V limit,. The 0.5-inch intercept values are provided in Table 4. Test # (Channel # - Shear Level) Table 3. Summary Data Table Protected Test Reach Actual Growth Period (wks) Flow depth (in) Flow velocity (fps) Flow (cfs) Manning s roughness, n Max Bed Shear Cumm. CSLI (in) C1-S1, Unvegetated C1-S2, Unvegetated C1-S3, Unvegetated C1-S4, Unvegetated C1-S5, Unvegetated C2-S1, Unvegetated C2-S2, Unvegetated C2-S3, Unvegetated C2-S4, Unvegetated C2-S5, Unvegetated C3-S1, Unvegetated C3-S2, Unvegetated C3-S3, Unvegetated C3-S4, Unvegetated C3-S5, Unvegetated S1, 6+ Wk Vegetated S2, 6+ Wk Vegetated S3, 6+ Wk Vegetated S4, 6+ Wk Vegetated S1, 1+ Yr Vegetated S2, 1+ Yr Vegetated S3, 1+ Yr Vegetated S4, 1+ Yr Vegetated S5, 1+ Yr Vegetated Table 4. ECP-3, Triple Net Polymer Fiber Matting & 4.5 staples/sy Product Unvegetated 6+ Week Vegetated 1+ Year Vegetated Condition Condition Condition Actual growth period, wks τ limit * 12.3* V limit * 25.0* * = ASTM D 6460 requires that three test replicates be performed using identical procedures to obtain an average threshold of performance. Thus, the results of vegetated testing, being single replicates of each condition, cannot be considered as an average threshold of performance.
8 Cummulative Soil Loss (CSLI), in Cummulative Soil Loss (CSLI), in y = x x R² = Limiting Shear via ASTM D 6460 ECP-3; 4.5 Anchors/SY y = x x R² = ECP-3, Triple Net Polymer Fiber Matting, over Loam Channel Erosion Testing December 12, 2011 Page 8 Unvegetated Run #1 Unvegetated Run #2 Unvegetated Run #3 All Unvegetated Runs With 7 Weeks of Vegetation With 62 Weeks of Vegetation Poly. (All Unvegetated Runs) Poly. (With 7 Weeks of Vegetation) Poly. (With 62 Weeks of Vegetation) 1 Limiting Shear = 3.3 psf Limiting Shear = 6.4 psf y = x x x R² = Limiting Shear = 12.3 psf Shear, psf Figure 13. Shear Stress vs. Soil Loss Tested Product y = x R² = Limiting Velocity via ASTM D 6460 ECP-3; 4.5 Anchors/SY Unvegetated Run #1 Unvegetated Run #2 Unvegetated Run #3 All Runs With 7 Weeks of Vegetation With 62 Weeks of Vegetation Power (All Runs) Poly. (With 7 Weeks of Vegetation) Poly. (With 62 Weeks of Vegetation) 1 Limiting Velocity = 12.1 ft/sec y = 8E-05x x x R² = 1 Limiting Velocity = 17.5 ft/sec y = 6E-05x x x R² = Limiting Velocity = 25 ft/sec Velocity, ft/sec Figure 14. Velocity vs. Soil Loss Tested Product
9 Manning's n Permissible Shear, psf Vegetation Loss vs Time of Vegetation Growth via ASTM D 6460 ECP-3; 4.5 Anchors/SY SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS ECP-3, Triple Net Polymer Fiber Matting, over Loam Channel Erosion Testing December 12, 2011 Page 9 Weeks of Vegetation Growth Initial Vegetative Density (stems/ft 2 ) Final Vegetative Density (stems/ft 2 ) % of Initial Vegetation after Max. Shear (%) 0 33% 6% Permissible Shear Time of Vegetation Growth, weeks Figure 15. Shear Stress vs. Time of Vegetation Growth Tested Product Manning's n vs. Water Depth ECP-3; 4.5 Anchors/SY Unvegetated Run #1 Unvegetated Run #2 Unvegetated Run #3 Al Unvegetated Runsl With 7 Weeks of Vegetation With 62 Weeks of Vegetation Power (Al Unvegetated Runsl) y = x R² = Water Depth, in Figure 16. Flow Depth vs. Manning s n Tested Product
10 Elevation Relative to Benchmark, ft Elevation Relative to Benchmark, ft ECP-3, Triple Net Polymer Fiber Matting, over Loam Channel Erosion Testing December 12, 2011 Page Energy Grade Lines - All Shear Levels ECP-3 Unvegetated Channel 1 Channel 2 Channel Shear Level y = x y = x y = x Shear Level y = x y = -0.09x y = x Shear Level y = x y = x y = x Shear Level y = x y = x y = x Shear Level y = x y = x y = x X-Section (ft along test reach) Figure 17a. Energy Grade Lines All Channels, Unvegetated Shears Tested Product Shear Level 5 Shear Level 4 Shear Level 3 Shear Level 2 Shear Level 1 7-Wk Vegetated Energy Grade Lines - All Shear Levels ECP-3 Vegetated Channels 62-Wk Vegetated y = x y = x y = x y = x y = x y = x y = x y = x y = x X-Section (ft along test reach) Figure 17b. Energy Grade Lines All Channels, Vegetated Shears Tested Product
11 Cummulative Soil Loss (CSLI), in Percent of Initial Vegetation after Shear Stress, % Vegetation Loss vs Shear via ASTM D 6460 ECP-3; 4.5 Anchors/SY ECP-3, Triple Net Polymer Fiber Matting, over Loam Channel Erosion Testing December 12, 2011 Page % With 7 Weeks of Vegetation With 62 Weeks of Vegetation Poly. (With 7 Weeks of Vegetation) Poly. (With 62 Weeks of Vegetation) 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% Initial 7-Week Vegetative Stand = 273 stems/ft 2 y = x x x + 1 R² = % 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% Initial 62-week Vegetative Stand = 481 stems/ft 2 y = 1E-04x x x + 1 R² = % Shear, psf Figure 18. Vegetation vs. Shear Stress Tested Product y = x x x R² = Limiting Shear via ASTM D 6460 Control Runs Unvegetated With 6 Weeks of Vegetation With 61 Weeks of Vegetation Poly. (Unvegetated) Power (With 6 Weeks of Vegetation) Poly. (With 61 Weeks of Vegetation) Limiting Shear = y = x R² = Limiting Shear = 0.5 psf y = x x x R² = Limiting Shear = 8.0 psf Shear, psf Figure 19. Shear Stress vs. Soil Loss Controls (Vegetation Only / No RECP)
12 ECP-3, Triple Net Polymer Fiber Matting, over Loam Channel Erosion Testing December 12, 2011 Page 12 Figure 20. Typical 6+ Week Control Vegetation-Only Before Testing Figure 22. Typical 1+ Year Control Vegetation-Only Before Testing Figure 21. Typical 6+ Week Control Vegetation-Only After Testing 5 Figure 23. Typical 1+ Year Control Vegetation-Only After Testing CONCLUSIONS Rectangular channel (flume) tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D 6460 using Loam soil protected with an RECP. Three replicates of the unvegetated condition and one replicate each of the 6+ week and 1+ year vegetated conditions were performed. Testing in a rectangular (vertical wall) channel was conducted to achieve increasing shear levels in an attempt to cause at least 0.5-inch of soil loss. Figure 13 shows the maximum bottom shear stress and associated soil loss from each flow event. Figure 14 presents the velocity versus soil loss. Figure 15 relates the permissible shear stress to the length of time the vegetation had been allowed to grow. Figure 16 relates channel liner roughness (Manning s n ) to flow depth. Together, this data describes the relevant performance characteristics of the tested RECP. It is important to note that ASTM D 6460, the procedure used to guide the testing reported herein, requires that three test replicates be performed using identical procedures to obtain an average threshold of performance. Thus, the results of the testing of vegetated channels reported herein, being single replicates of each condition, cannot be considered as an average threshold of performance. The data in Figures 17a, 17b, 18 and 19, the calculated energy grade lines for each channel and shear level, the retained vegetation at each shear level, and the control condition shear stress vs. soil loss relationships, are included to provide a reference for the reported test results.
13 ECP-3, Triple Net Polymer Fiber Matting, over Loam Channel Erosion Testing December 12, 2011 Appendix APPENDIX A RECORDED DATA Test Record Sheets (Note: Unvegetated Test Record Sheets are in a Separate Report)
14 2-1 CHANNEL 2 - SHEAR STRESS 1 Date: 9/29/10 Start Time: 11:30 AM End Time: 12:30 PM Soil: Loam Target Shear (psf): 2.00 Slope: 20% 40 ft long flume 20 ft test section RECP: ECP-3 Anchorage: rpms 2 ft wide flume TEST DATA Outlet Weir Weir Channel Targets FLOW Water Depth, in Weir width (ft) = 2 Water Velocity, ft/s ft A B C Flow Rate, cfs Cross-section 1 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 2.8 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in 0.0 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in 0.0 Cross-section 2 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 4.0 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 3 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 4.5 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft 25.5Loss/Gain, in -0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 4 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 4.2 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in 0.0 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in 0.0 Cross-section 5 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 4.1 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 6 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 3.5 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in 0.0 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in 0.0 Cross-section 7 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 3.0 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in 0.0 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in 0.0 Cross-section 8 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 3.0 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in 0.0 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 9 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 3.4 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in 0.0 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 10 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 3.3 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 11 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 3.5 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = pins / sy Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in 0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in 0.0 Soil Loss / Gain, in Avg Bottom Loss/Gain per Cross-Section = 0.0 Clopper Soil Loss, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss per Cross-Section = -0.1
15 2-2 CHANNEL 2 - SHEAR STRESS 2 Date: 9.29/10 Start Time: 12:45 PM End Time: 1:45 PM Soil: Loam Target Shear (psf): 4.00 Slope: 20% 40 ft long flume 20 ft test section RECP: ECP-3 Anchorage: 1500 rpms 2 ft wide flume TEST DATA Inlet Weir Weir Channel Targets FLOW Water Depth, in Weir width (ft) = 4 Water Velocity, ft/s ft A B C Flow Rate, cfs Cross-section 1 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 6.1 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 2 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 6.8 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 3 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 7.5 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 4 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 8.1 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 5 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 7.5 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 6 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 7.5 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 7 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 6.8 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 8 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 6.7 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.3 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.3 Cross-section 9 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 6.2 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in 0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 10 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 6.6 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in 0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 11 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 6.8 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = pins / sy Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in 0.0 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in 0.0 Soil Loss / Gain, in Avg Bottom Loss/Gain per Cross-Section = -0.1 Clopper Soil Loss, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss per Cross-Section = -0.1
16 2-3 CHANNEL 2 - SHEAR STRESS 3 Date: 9/29/10 Start Time: 3:00 PM End Time: 4:00 PM Soil: Loam Target Shear (psf): 8.00 Slope: 20% 40 ft long flume 20 ft test section RECP: ECP-3 Anchorage: rpms 2 ft wide flume TEST DATA Inlet Weir Weir Channel Targets FLOW Water Depth, in Weir width (ft) = 2 Water Velocity, ft/s ft A B C Flow Rate, cfs Cross-section 1 A B C 0.2d 0.6d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 12.0 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.2 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.2 Cross-section 2 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 12.0 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.2 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.2 Cross-section 3 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 12.2 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in 0.2 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 4 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 12.3 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 5 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 12.5 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 6 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 12.8 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.1 Cross-section 7 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 12.7 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = 0.0 Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.2 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.2 Cross-section 8 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 12.8 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.4 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.4 Cross-section 9 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 13.1 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.2 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.3 Cross-section 10 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 13.2 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.6 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.6 Cross-section 11 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 13.2 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = pins / sy Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.4 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.4 Soil Loss / Gain, in Avg Bottom Loss/Gain per Cross-Section = -0.2 Clopper Soil Loss, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss per Cross-Section = -0.3
17 2-4 CHANNEL 2 - SHEAR STRESS 4 Date: 10/1/10 Start Time: 2:00 PM End Time: 3:00 PM Soil: Loam Target Shear (psf): Slope: 20% 40 ft long flume 20 ft test section RECP: ECP-3 Anchorage: rpms 2 ft wide flume TEST DATA Inlet Weir Weir Channel Targets FLOW Water Depth, in Weir width (ft) = 2 C = 0.00 Water Velocity, ft/s ft A B C Flow Rate, cfs Cross-section 1 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 16.8 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.4 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.4 Cross-section 2 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 17.0 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.2 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.2 Cross-section 3 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 17.5 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in 0.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.2 Cross-section 4 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 17.4 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.2 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.2 Cross-section 5 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 17.3 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.3 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.3 Cross-section 6 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 17.5 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.2 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.2 Cross-section 7 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 17.5 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.5 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.5 Cross-section 8 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 18.0 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.8 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.8 Cross-section 9 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 17.8 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -0.7 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -0.7 Cross-section 10 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 17.9 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -1.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -1.1 Cross-section 11 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 17.8 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = pins / sy Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in -1.1 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in -1.1 Soil Loss / Gain, in Avg Bottom Loss/Gain per Cross-Section = -0.5 Clopper Soil Loss, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss per Cross-Section = -0.5
18 3-1 CHANNEL 3 - SHEAR STRESS 1 Date: 10/18/11 Start Time: 10:00 AM End Time: 11:00 AM Soil: Loam Target Shear (psf): 2.00 Slope: 20% 40 ft long flume 20 ft test section RECP: ECP-3 Anchorage: rpms 2 ft wide flume TEST DATA Outlet Weir Weir Channel Targets FLOW Water Depth, in Weir width (ft) = 2 Water Velocity, ft/s ft A B C Flow Rate, cfs Cross-section 1 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 4.73 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 2 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 4.81 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 3 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 5.06 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft 25.5Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 4 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 5.68 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 5 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 5.30 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 6 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 5.64 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in 0.01 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 7 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 6.08 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in 0.08 Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in 0.00 Cross-section 8 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 5.85 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 9 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 5.90 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 10 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 6.43 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 11 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = 6.48 Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = pins / sy Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Soil Loss / Gain, in Avg Bottom Loss/Gain per Cross-Section = Clopper Soil Loss, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss per Cross-Section = -0.05
19 3-2 CHANNEL 3 - SHEAR STRESS 2 Date: 10/18/11 Start Time: 11:45 AM End Time: 12:45 PM Soil: Loam Target Shear (psf): 4.00 Slope: 20% 40 ft long flume 20 ft test section RECP: ECP-3 Anchorage: 1500 rpms 2 ft wide flume TEST DATA Inlet Weir Weir Channel Targets FLOW Water Depth, in Weir width (ft) = Water Velocity, ft/s ft A B C Flow Rate, cfs Cross-section 1 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 2 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 3 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 4 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 5 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 6 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 7 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 8 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 9 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 10 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 11 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = pins / sy Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Soil Loss / Gain, in Avg Bottom Loss/Gain per Cross-Section = Clopper Soil Loss, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss per Cross-Section = -0.13
20 3-3 CHANNEL 3 - SHEAR STRESS 3 Date: 10/18/11 Start Time: 2:00 PM End Time: Soil: Loam Target Shear (psf): 3.00 Slope: 20% 40 ft long flume 20 ft test section RECP: ECP-3 Anchorage: rpms 2 ft wide flume TEST DATA Inlet Weir Weir Channel Targets FLOW Water Depth, in Weir width (ft) = 4 Water Velocity, ft/s ft A B C Flow Rate, cfs Cross-section 1 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 2 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 3 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 4 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 5 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 6 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 7 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 8 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 9 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 10 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 11 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = pins / sy Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Soil Loss / Gain, in Avg Bottom Loss/Gain per Cross-Section = Clopper Soil Loss, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss per Cross-Section = -0.26
21 3-4 CHANNEL 3 - SHEAR STRESS 4 Date: 10/18/11 Start Time: 4:00 PM End Time: Soil: Loam Target Shear (psf): 4.00 Slope: 20% 40 ft long flume 20 ft test section RECP: ECP-3 Anchorage: rpms 2 ft wide flume TEST DATA Inlet Weir Weir Channel Targets FLOW Water Depth, in Weir width (ft) = 2.00 C = 0.00 Water Velocity, ft/s ft A B C Flow Rate, cfs Cross-section 1 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 2 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 3 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 4 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 5 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 6 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 7 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 8 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 9 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 10 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 11 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = pins / sy Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Soil Loss / Gain, in Avg Bottom Loss/Gain per Cross-Section = Clopper Soil Loss, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss per Cross-Section = -0.38
22 3-5 CHANNEL 3 - SHEAR STRESS 5 Date: 11/8/11 Start Time: 4:00 PM End Time: Soil: Loam Target Shear (psf): 4.00 Slope: 20% 40 ft long flume 20 ft test section RECP: ECP-3 Anchorage: 1900 rpms 2 ft wide flume TEST DATA Inlet Weir Weir Channel Targets FLOW Water Depth, in Weir width (ft) = 2.00 C = 0.00 Water Velocity, ft/s ft A B C Flow Rate, cfs Cross-section 1 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 2 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 3 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 4 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 5 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 6 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 7 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 8 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 9 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 10 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = ft Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Cross-section 11 A B C 0.2d 0.6d 0.8d To Water Surf, cm To original Surface Elev, cm To eroded Surface Elev, cm Vavg (fps) = Soil Loss / Gain, cm navg = pins / sy Stress (psf) Stress (psf) Stress (psf) Stress (psf) Stress (psf) Stress (psf) Stress (psf) Stress (psf) Stress (psf) Stress (psf) Stress (psf) Clopper Soil Loss, cm Flow (cfs) = Avg Bottom Loss/Gain, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss, in Soil Loss / Gain, in Avg Bottom Loss/Gain per Cross-Section = Clopper Soil Loss, in Avg Clopper Soil Loss per Cross-Section = -0.54
23 Sample Period & Date (Plots Started: 8/18/10) Channel Product Vegetation Count 6-Week Vegetated ECP-3 Zone # Stems Stems/ft 2 Blades* # Ht. Avg., in. Sample Vegetation Count Period & Channel 1-Year Vegetated Date (Plots Product ECP3 % of Started: # Initial 9/14/10) Zone # Stems Stems / ft 2 Blades* Ht. Avg., in. % of Initial Initial - 9/29/10 After Shear #1-9/29/10 After Shear #2-9/29/10 After Shear #3-9/29/10 After Shear #4-10/1/10 After Shear #5-0/0/ Initial /18/ Avg % Avg % After Shear # /18/ Avg % Avg % After Shear # /18/ Avg % Avg % After Shear # /18/ Avg % Avg % After Shear # /18/ Avg % Avg % After Shear # /8/ Avg 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.0% Avg % Sample Area: 3" x 3" = ft 2 Sample Area: 3" x 3" = ft 2
Vegetated Large-Scale Channel Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6460) (Modified procedure used for vegetated channel tests)
Vegetated Large-Scale Channel Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6460) (Modified procedure used for vegetated channel tests) of North American Green s P300, Double Net Poly Fiber Mat, over Loam May 2013 Submitted
More informationLarge-Scale Sediment Retention Device Testing (ASTM D 7351) FLEXSTORM Inlet Filter
Large-Scale Sediment Retention Device Testing (ASTM D 7351) of FLEXSTORM Inlet Filter February 2009 Submitted to: Inlet & Pipe Protection, Inc. 24137 W. 111 th St., Unit A Naperville, IL 60564 Attn: Mr.
More informationSTATE OF OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIFICATION 836 SEEDING AND EROSION CONTROL WITH TURF REINFORCING MAT January 18, 2013
836.01 Description 836.02 Materials 836.03 Construction 836.04 Maintenance 836.05 Method of Measurement 836.06 Basis of Payment STATE OF OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIFICATION 836
More informationSpecifications for the Selection and Application of Erosion Control Blanket on Slopes or Channels
Specifications for the Selection and Application of Erosion Control Blanket on Slopes or Channels Excel CS-3 All Natural - Provided by Western Excelsior PART I - GENERAL 1.01 Summary A. The Erosion Control
More informationRecyclex TRM TURF REINFORCEMENT MAT SPECIFICATION
Recyclex TRM TURF REINFORCEMENT MAT SPECIFICATION PART I - GENERAL 1.01 Summary A. The Turf Reinforcement Mat (TRM) contains post-consumer recycled polyester fiber for the purpose of erosion control and
More informationStandards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey May 2012 STANDARD FOR SLOPE PROTECTION STRUCTURES. Definition
STANDARD FOR SLOPE PROTECTION STRUCTURES Definition Structures to safely conduct surface runoff from the top of a slope to the bottom of the slope. Purpose The purpose of this practice is to convey storm
More informationARMORMAX ENGINEERED EARTH ARMORING SOLUTIONS
ARMORMAX ENGINEERED EARTH ARMORING SOLUTIONS The ARMORMAX Engineered Earth Armoring Solution is the most advanced flexible armoring technology available for severe erosion and surficial slope stability
More informationStandards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey May 2012 STANDARD FOR GRASSED WATERWAYS. Definition. Purpose
STANDARD FOR GRASSED WATERWAYS Definition A natural or constructed watercourse shaped or graded in earth materials and stabilized with suitable vegetation for the safe conveyance of runoff water. Purpose
More informationDiversion Dikes. Fe=0.95
2.2 Diversion Dike Erosion Control Description: A diversion dike is a compacted soil mound, which redirects runoff to a desired location. The dike is typically stabilized with natural grass for low velocities
More informationCurlex II EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SPECIFICATION
Curlex II EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SPECIFICATION PART I - GENERAL 1.01 Summary A. The erosion control blanket contains excelsior wood fiber for the purpose of erosion control and revegetation as described
More informationAEC Premier Straw Double Net Quick Mow EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SPECIFICATION
AEC Premier Straw Double Net Quick Mow EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SPECIFICATION PART I - GENERAL 1.01 Summary A. The erosion control blanket contains agricultural straw fibers for the purpose of erosion control
More informationMr. Michael Malone CPS Energy 145 Navarro Street San Antonio, Texas Project No
Environmental Resources Management January 13, 2017 Mr. Michael Malone 145 Navarro Street San Antonio, Texas 78205 Project No. 0352436 CityCentre Four 840 West Sam Houston Parkway North, Suite 600 Houston,
More informationCurlex High Velocity EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SPECIFICATION
Curlex High Velocity EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SPECIFICATION PART I - GENERAL 1.01 Summary A. The erosion control blanket contains excelsior wood fiber for the purpose of erosion control and revegetation
More informationTreatment Volume: Curve Numbers. Composite CN or Not? Treatment Volume: Curve Numbers. Treatment Volume: Calculation. Treatment Volume: Calculation
Stormwater Engineering Bioretention Design Bill Hunt, PE, Ph.D. Extension Specialist & Assistant Professor NCSU-BAE www.bae.ncsu.edu/stormwater Bioretention Design Six Step Process 1 Determine Volume to
More informationEvaluation of ALDOT Ditch Check Practices using Large Scale Testing Techniques
Research Report No. 2 Project Number: 930 826R Evaluation of ALDOT Ditch Check Practices using Large Scale Testing Techniques Large scale Channel Testing (ASTM D 7208 modified) of Evaluation of ALDOT Class
More informationCatch Drains Part 4: Geotextile-lined
Catch Drains Part 4: Geotextile-lined DRAINAGE CONTROL TECHNIQUE Low Gradient Velocity Control Short Term Steep Gradient Channel Lining Medium-Long Term Outlet Control Soil Treatment Permanent [1] [1]
More informationCase History: Value Engineering of Driven H-Piles for Slope Stability on the Missouri River
DEEP FOUNDATIONS 207 Case History: Value Engineering of Driven H-Piles for Slope Stability on the Missouri River W. Robert Thompson, III, 1 M.ASCE, P.E., Jeffrey R. Hill, 2 M.ASCE, P.E., and J. Erik Loehr,
More informationB. Install storm drain inlet protection to prevent clogging of the stormsewer and sediment loads to downstream stormwater facilities or waterbodies.
The language provided in these specifications is meant to serve as a reminder and provide a generic example of the type of language that should be provided in final construction documents. This language
More informationINTERLOCK BETWEEN PARTICLES AT EACH PERFORATION
for Storm Water Management RUN OFF CONTROLS Porous Parking & Vehicle Access Cellular Confinement Systems (CCS) A Cellular Confinement System (CCS) is an engineered, expandable, polyethylene, honeycomb-like
More informationLyon Creek Cedar Way Stormwater Detention Dam Operation and Maintenance Manual
Lyon Creek Cedar Way Stormwater Detention Dam Operation and Maintenance Manual Prepared by: Mike Shaw Stormwater Program Manager City of Mountlake Terrace January 2010 Section I General Information This
More informationSECTION 806 WATER COURSE AND SLOPE EROSION PROTECTION
Change No. 7 SECTION 806 WATER COURSE AND SLOPE EROSION PROTECTION 806.1 DESCRIPTION This work is furnishing, placement and maintenance of soil erosion control material of the type indicated. 806.2 MATERIAL
More informationROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Small Pond Approval. SWM MD-378 Pond Checklist Training 10/17/07. Exemptions EMBANKMENT HEIGHT. Height of Dam Weir Wall
SWM MD-378 Pond Checklist Training 10/17/07 Ken Wolfe Warren Johnson USDA, NRCS Frederick, Maryland ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Small Pond Approval MDE, WMA, Dam Safety Division Authority (COMAR 26.17.04.03)
More informationSediment Basin. Fe= (Depends on soil type)
3.9 Sediment Control Description: A sediment basin is an embankment with a controlled outlet that detains stormwater runoff, resulting in the settling of suspended sediment. The basin provides treatment
More informationAPPENDIX H. Stabilization Measure Fact Sheets
APPENDIX H Stabilization Measure Fact Sheets Prepared for The Boeing Company 5800 Woolsey Canyon Road, MC: 033-T436 Canoga Park, CA 91304-1148 Appendix H Stabilization Measure Fact Sheets Prepared by 6701
More informationAPPENDIX C DURING CONSTRUCTION BMP TABLES
APPENDIX C DURING CONSTRUCTION BMP TABLES Table C.1 Table C.2 Table C.3 Erosion Prevention BMPs Sediment Control BMPs Stormwater Runoff and Ground Control Measures STORM WATER QUALITY DESIGN MANUAL Appendix
More informationSection Soil Erosion Protection Tender No. [ ] Page 1
Tender No. [ ] Page 1 1.0 GENREAL 1.1 [REFERENCES].1 Provide soil erosion protection in accordance with the following standards (latest revision) except where specified otherwise..2 American Society for
More informationCOMPACTED CLAY LINERS
Technical Reference Document for Liquid Manure Storage Structures COMPACTED CLAY LINERS Table of Contents SECTION 1 - PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1.1. Purpose of the Technical Reference Document 1.2. Requirement
More informationInstallation and Maintenance of Erosion Control BMPs
Installation and Maintenance of Erosion Control BMPs Or Common BMPs Applications Specifications Installation Problems Maintenance Utility Design Professionals Clarifications, proactive problem solving
More informationPART 3 - STANDARDS FOR SEWERAGE FACILITIES DESIGN OF STORM SEWERS
PART 3 - STANDARDS FOR SEWERAGE FACILITIES 3.3 - DESIGN OF STORM SEWERS 3.301 Design of Storm Sewers A. General Information B. Investigations and Surveys C. Special Projects 3.302 Design Criteria for Storm
More informationStormwater Local Design Manual For Houston County, Georgia
Stormwater Local Design Manual For Houston County, Georgia Adopted November 15, 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. FORWARD... 1 2. GENERAL LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS... 2 2.1. DETENTION REQUIREMENTS... 2 2.1.1.
More informationStraw Bale Barrier. - Along the face and at grade breaks of exposed and erodible slopes to shorten slope length and spread runoff as sheet flow
Straw Bale Barrier SE-9 Objectives EC Erosion Control SE Sediment Control TR Tracking Control WE Wind Erosion Control Non-Stormwater NS Management Control Waste Management and WM Materials Pollution Control
More informationBest Management Practice (BMP) Guidance Manual
Best Management Practice (BMP) Guidance Manual INTRODUCTION BMP examples in this guide provide ways to meet erosion and sediment control requirements. Best Management Practices are not limited to these
More informationConstruction Inspection Checklists
III. Construction Inspection Checklists 33 Bioretention - Construction Inspection Checklist Project: Location: Site Status: Date: Time: Inspector: Construction Sequence Satisfactory / Unsatisfactory Comments
More informationAppendix J: Storm Conveyance Design Parameters
Appendix J: Storm Conveyance Design Parameters Drain Commissioner 39 February 2005 STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA A. STORM SEWERS 1. The required discharge capacity shall be determined by the Rational
More informationDrainage geocomposite workshop
Drainage geocomposite workshop By Gregory N. Richardson, Sam R. Allen, C. Joel Sprague A number of recent designer s columns have focused on the design of drainage geocomposites (Richardson and Zhao, 998),
More informationChapter 5 Hydraulic Structures
Chapter 5 Hydraulic Structures 5.1 Flow Splitter Designs 5.1.1 General Design Criteria A flow splitter must be designed to deliver the WQ design flow rate specified in this volume to the WQ treatment facility.
More informationCEEN Geotechnical Engineering
CEEN 3160 - Geotechnical Engineering Lab Report 1 Soil Classification prepared by Student Name 1 Student Name 2 Student Name 3 Student Name 4 Tuesday Lab Time 9:30 10:45 Lab Team 1 Submission Date INTRODUCTION
More informationStraw Bale Barrier. Parallel to a roadway to keep sediment off paved areas
Categories EC Erosion Control SE Sediment Control TC Tracking Control WE Wind Erosion Control Non-Stormwater NS Management Control Waste Management and WM Materials Pollution Control Legend: Primary Objective
More informationPrecipitation Surface Cover Topography Soil Properties
Precipitation Surface Cover Topography Soil Properties Intrinsic capacity of rainfall to cause erosion Influenced by Amount, intensity, terminal velocity, drop size and drop size distribution of rain.
More informationStandards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey May 2012 STANDARD FOR RIPRAP. Conditions Where Practice Applies
STANDARD FOR RIPRAP Definition A layer of loose rock, aggregate, bagged concrete, gabions, or concrete revetment blocks placed over an erodible soil surface. Purpose The purpose of riprap is to protect
More informationAdvanced Synthetic Grass Geomembrane Liner For Long-Term Environmental Closure
US Patent Number 9151009 B2 Advanced Synthetic Grass Geomembrane Liner For Long-Term Environmental Closure Bringing Sustainable Solutions to the Surface LiteEarth is an engineered, patented synthetic grass
More informationRE: Final Drainage Letter: Northwest Aurora Alley Improvements 2016
April 12, 2016 Mr. Craig Perl, P.E. Senior Engineer City of Aurora Public Works Department 15151 E. Alameda Parkway Aurora, CO 80012 RE: Final Drainage Letter: Northwest Aurora Alley Improvements 2016
More informationGRASS-LINED CHANNEL (acre) CODE 840
NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE ILLINOIS URBAN MANUAL PRACTICE STANDARD GRASS-LINED CHANNEL (acre) CODE 840 (Source: NC Erosion and Sediment Control Field Manual) DEFINITION A natural or constructed
More informationMODEL Stormwater Local Design Manual. City of Centerville
MODEL Stormwater Local Design Manual City of Centerville Adopted December 6, 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. FORWARD... 1 2. GENERAL LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS... 1 2.1. DETENTION REQUIREMENTS... 1 2.1.1. Discharge
More informationDetermination of Design Infiltration Rates for the Sizing of Infiltration based Green Infrastructure Facilities
Determination of Design Infiltration Rates for the Sizing of Infiltration based Green Infrastructure Facilities 1 Introduction This document, developed by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
More informationChapter 8. Inlets. 8.0 Introduction. 8.1 General
. Introduction This chapter provides criteria and design guides for evaluating and designing storm sewer inlets in the City of Centennial. The review of all planning submittals will be based on the criteria
More informationAugust 15, 2006 (Revised) July 3, 2006 Project No A
August 15, 2006 (Revised) July 3, 2006 Project No. 01-05-0854-101A Mr. David Reed, P.E. Protean Design Group 100 East Pine Street, Suite 306 Orlando, Florida 32801 Preliminary Soil Survey Report Polk Parkway
More informationCurlex Blocs Natural Filters for Challenging Conditions
Curlex Blocs Natural Filters for Challenging Conditions August 2013 By: American Excelsior Company ErosionLab Kurt Kelsey, M.S., CPESC, CPSWQ Director of Technical Services 831 Pioneer Ave Rice Lake, WI
More informationSPECIFICATIONS FOR PRECAST MODULAR BLOCK RETAINING WALL SYSTEM (revised 5/8/7)
Page 1 of 7 STONE STRONG SYSTEMS SPECIFICATIONS FOR PRECAST MODULAR BLOCK RETAINING WALL SYSTEM (revised 5/8/7) PART 1: GENERAL 1.01 Description A. Work includes furnishing and installing precast modular
More informationExperience of a Large Scale Unintentionally Long Surcharge on Organic Soils
Experience of a Large Scale Unintentionally Long Surcharge on Organic Soils Ying Liu, Ph.D., P.E., Senior Engineer, Group Delta Consultants, Inc., 37 Amapola Ave., Suite 212, Torrance, CA. Email: yingl@groupdelta.com
More informationTEMPORARY SEDIMENT TRAP CODE
ILLINOIS URBAN MANUAL PRACTICE STANDARD TEMPORARY SEDIMENT TRAP CODE 960 Source: DEFINITION A small temporary stormwater storage structure designed to trap sediment. PURPOSE The purpose of this practice
More informationAN EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL CLOGGING OF GEONETS AND GEOCOMPOSITES DUE TO SUSPENDED SOIL PARTICLES
AN EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL CLOGGING OF GEONETS AND GEOCOMPOSITES DUE TO SUSPENDED SOIL PARTICLES Dhani B. Narejo GSE Lining Technology, Inc., Houston, TX USA ABSTRACT A series of tests were performed to
More informationDrop Height For Channel Erosion Control
Drop Height For Channel Erosion Control James C.Y. Guo, Professor and Director Department of Civil Engineering, U. of Colorado at Denver, Denver, Colorado 8017 E-mail: James.Guo@cudenver.edu Introduction
More informationRECP LABORATORY PERFORMANCE TESTING OVERVIEW
RECP LABORATORY PERFORMANCE TESTING OVERVIEW C. Joel Sprague, Sr. Engineer TRI/Environmental, Inc., PO Box 9192, Greenville, SC 29604 Phone: 864/242-2220 Fax: 864/242-3107 Cjoelsprague@cs.com Sam Allen,
More informationGEOSYTHETIC SLOPE SPEC-V0704rev.doc STANDARD SPECIAL PROVISION FOR GEOSYNTHETIC REINFORCED SLOPE CONSTRUCTION
GEOSYTHETIC SLOPE SPEC-V0704rev.doc STANDARD SPECIAL PROVISION FOR GEOSYNTHETIC REINFORCED SLOPE CONSTRUCTION I. DESCRIPTION - This work consists of furnishing the required materials and construction of
More informationStructured Geomembrane Liners in Landfill Base and Closure Systems
World of Coal Ash (WOCA) Conference - May 9-12, 2011, in Denver, CO, USA http://www.flyash.info/ Structured Geomembrane Liners in Landfill Base and Closure Systems Clark West Agru America Inc. ABSTRACT:
More informationOld Mill School Stream Restoration
Project Overview This conceptual plan restores and stabilizes two consecutive reaches of a highly incised and unstable stream and reconnects them with the floodplain. The restoration reaches are part of
More informationSOIL MECHANICS Assignment #2: Soil Classification Solution.
Geotechnical Engineering Research Laboratory One University Avenue Lowell, Massachusetts 01854 Edward L. Hajduk, D.Eng, PE Lecturer PA105D Tel: (978) 934 2621 Fax: (978) 934 3052 e mail: Edward_Hajduk@uml.edu
More informationSECTION SPECIFICATION FOR STONEBRIDGE RETAINING WALL SYSTEM
SECTION 32 32 23 SPECIFICATION FOR STONEBRIDGE RETAINING WALL SYSTEM PART 1: GENERAL 1.01 Scope Work includes furnishing all materials, labor, equipment, and supervision to install a Stonebridge segmental
More informationBENTOMAT CL GEOSYNTHETIC CLAY LINER SPECIFICATION GUIDELINES
BENTOMAT CL GEOSYNTHETIC CLAY LINER SPECIFICATION GUIDELINES This specification is intended for use as a GENERAL GUIDELINE for developing a specification for a specific project. It is NOT intended as a
More informationTown of Essex, Vermont January, 2017 Standard Specifications For Construction CHAPTER 3 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
CHAPTER 3 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL CHAPTER 3 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Section 300 General Summary All projects constructed within the Town of Essex shall be constructed in strict accordance with
More informationAvon Lake Municipal Landfill, Lorain County Ohio Administrative Code (OAC) Rule Authorization
State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency STREET ADDRESS: MAILING ADDRESS: Lazarus Government Center TELE: (614) 644-3020 FAX: (614) 644-3184 P.O. Box 1049 122 S. Front Street www.epa.state.oh.us Columbus,
More informationObservations from Several Condition Assessments of Prestressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe used at Energy Generation Facilities
147 Observations from Several Condition Assessments of Prestressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe used at Energy Generation Facilities Todd Stong PE 1, Ron R. Jorgenson 2, and Jacob Sauer 3 1 Senior Engineer,
More informationForsyth County Procurement
August 1, 2017 Forsyth County Procurement Donna Kukarola, CPPO, CPPB, Procurement Director ADDENDUM #2 Bid 17-72-3340 For: Providing all materials, equipment and labor for the Jot em Down Road Water Tank
More informationBMP 6.4.4: Infiltration Trench
BMP 6.4.4: Infiltration Trench An Infiltration Trench is a leaky pipe in a stone filled trench with a level bottom. An Infiltration Trench may be used as part of a larger storm sewer system, such as a
More informationThe Next Generation of Storm Water Treatment Technology
The Next Generation of Storm Water Treatment Technology Tubes Fiber Filtration Tubes Tubes are the industry s most cost effective storm water treatment device designed to effectively trap, filter and treat
More informationFIRM NAME DESIGNER: CHECKER: DATE: FPID #: DESCRIPTION: COUNTY: DRAINAGE DESIGN CHECKLIST. Designers Initials. Checkers Initials.
I. Drainage Report A. Executive Summary - Brief Overview of Project Drainage Design B. Project Description 1. Existing Conditions 2. Proposed Project Conditions 3. Project Justification Narrative - Basin
More informationAlternative BMPs for Erosion Prevention & Sediment Control
Alternative BMPs for Erosion Prevention & Sediment Control J.P. Johns, PE - Woolpert March 11, 2011 Agenda + Traditional BMPs + Performance Specifications + Erosion Prevention + Sediment Control + The
More informationApril 7, Webster Street Sub-Surface Stormwater Storage System Bid No Bid Date: 4/13/17 ADDENDUM NO 1
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT David A. Jones, P.E., Director April 7, 2017 Webster Street Sub-Surface Stormwater Storage System Bid No. 2017-022 Bid Date: 4/13/17 ADDENDUM NO 1 Please make the following changes
More informationCHAPTER 200 STORM SEWER CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS
CHAPTER 200 STORM SEWER CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS Storm Sewer System: 1. Detention/retention of stormwater runoff shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of the DuPage County Countywide Stormwater
More informationAnchorplex retaining wall construction guide. Building. Anchorplex. Retaining Wall Systems
Anchorplex retaining wall construction guide Building Anchorplex Retaining Wall Systems Table of Contents and ow to Use This Guide table of contents ow to Use This Guide. 2 About the Anchorplex System.
More informationInflow Design Flood Control System Plan
Inflow Design Flood Control System Plan For Compliance with the Coal Combustion Residuals Rule (40 CFR Part 257) Cherokee Station - CCR Surface Impoundments Public Service Company of Colorado Denver, Colorado
More information2010 NTPEP Report Series
2010 NTPEP Report Series NTPEP Report 8507.4 LABORATORY EVALUATION OF GEOSYNTHETIC REINFORCEMENT FINAL PRODUCT QUALIFICATION REPORT FOR TENSAR UX-MSE / UX-HS GEOGRID PRODUCT LINE Report Issued: February
More informationNovember 13, IP3406. Mr. Uriah Sowell Rooney Engineering 115 Inverness Drive East, Suite 300, Englewood, CO 80112
November 13, 2015 103IP3406 Mr. Uriah Sowell Rooney Engineering 115 Inverness Drive East, Suite 300, Englewood, CO 80112 Subject: Infiltration Testing Gates Road Valve Site Sunoco Pennsylvania Pipeline
More informationIrrigation Rehabilitation Program Design and Construction Standards
Irrigation Rehabilitation Program Design and Construction Standards Prepared by the IRP Standards Review Committee For Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development, Irrigation Secretariat April 26, 2010 Adopted
More informationPRODUCT SPECIFICATION CSI FORMAT Slope and Channel Grid Systems April 2009
PRODUCT SPECIFICATION CSI FORMAT Slope and Channel Grid Systems April 2009 Cell-Tek Geosynthetics LLC 2431 Crofton Lane, Suite 9 Crofton, MD 21114 USA Toll Free (888) 851-0051 Phone (410) 721-4844 Fax
More informationPERMEABLE INTERLOCKING PAVERS
PERMEABLE INTERLOCKING PAVERS PART 1 - GENERAL 1.01 SECTION INCLUDES A. Subgrade Preparation B. Placement of Storage Aggregate C. Placement of Filter Aggregate D. Placement of Bedding Course E. Placement
More informationNorth America s leader of complete geosynthetic solutions. Golf Course Solutions. To view our complete product line visit us at
North America s leader of complete geosynthetic solutions Golf Course Solutions To view our complete product line visit us at www.terrafixgeo.com A golf course requires attentive and competent management.
More informationSession A6- Mannings "n" roughness characteristic occurring in semi-smooth turbulent flow of nature- Iike fishways
University of Massachusetts - Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst International Conference on Engineering and Ecohydrology for Fish Passage International Conference on Engineering and Ecohydrology for Fish
More informationApplying landforming to reclamation: A case study in Central Appalachia
Applying landforming to reclamation: A case study in Central Appalachia Leslie Hopkinson, John Quaranta April 12, 2017 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering West Virginia University WEST VIRGINIA
More informationJacobi, Toombs, and Lanz, Inc.
Area 5: Blackiston Mill Road at Dead Man's Hollow Flooding Assessment Jacobi, Toombs, and Lanz, Inc. This document summarizes an assessment of drainage and flooding concerns and provides recommendations
More informationBUILDING CODES Presented by CORUM ENGINEERING
BUILDING CODES Presented by CORUM ENGINEERING AGENDA I. The Basics of Foundations A. Footer Designs B. Foundation Walls 1. Non-Backfilled Walls 2. Backfilled Walls (Retaining Walls) C. Slabs vs. Crawl
More informationSPECIFICATION FOR PREFABRICATED VERTICAL DRAIN
SPECIFICATION FOR PREFABRICATED VERTICAL DRAIN 1.0 GENERAL This work comprises of supply and installation of prefabricated vertical drains in accordance to the Specifications and Drawings. 2.0 MATERIALS
More informationSTATE OF OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIFICATION 863 REINFORCED SOIL SLOPES. October 19, 2012
STATE OF OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 863.01 Description 863.02 Materials 863.03 Construction 863.04 Method of Measurement 863.05 Basis of Payment SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIFICATION 863 REINFORCED SOIL SLOPES
More informationErosion Control Solutions
Knowledge. Solutions. Service. Water Quality and Soil Erosion Soil erosion is a serious environmental threat and is a major contributor to the degradation of water quality. Wind, rain and runoff displace
More informationEffect of Land Surface on Runoff Generation
Effect of Land Surface on Runoff Generation Context: Hydrologic Cycle Runoff vs Infiltration Infiltration: Process by which water on the ground surface enters the soil Runoff: Water (from rain, snowmelt,
More informationEART 204. Water. Dr. Slawek Tulaczyk. Earth Sciences, UCSC
EART 204 Water Dr. Slawek Tulaczyk Earth Sciences, UCSC 1 Water is an amazing liquid, (high heat capacity - particularly in phase transitions, maximum density at ca. 4 deg. C) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Basin Hydrologic
More informationINSTRUCTIONAL BULLETIN NO
scwr South Carolina Department of Transportation June 18, 004 INSTRUCTIONAL BULLETIN NO. 00413 SUBJECT: Rolled Erosion Control Production (Revised) EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 004 SUPERSEDES: Plan Preparation
More information16.0 Water Quality Management Criteria for Developed Land
October 2003, Revised February 2005 Criteria for Developed Land Page 1 16.1 Introduction 16.0 Water Quality Management Criteria for Developed Land Stormwater quality control is an integral part of any
More informationIn preparation for constructing buildings on a property, the builder. Site Preparation CHAPTER
CHAPTER 3 Site Preparation In preparation for constructing buildings on a property, the builder must consider a number of factors related to code requirements. The buildings must be located according to
More informationWastewater Flow Monitoring Services
Wastewater Flow Monitoring Services For San Gabriel, CA July 13, 2015 through July 21, 2015 Revised October 9, 2015 Leaders in Sewer Flow Monitoring Services 601 N. Parkcenter Dr., Suite 209 Santa Ana,
More informationSection 1I-3 - Bioswales
BIOSWALES (Numbering pending) These specifications compliment the bioswale design portion of the Iowa Stormwater Management Manual in Chapter 2, Section 2I-3. Sections of the following documents, as referenced
More informationDETERMINATION OF THE LONG TERM PROPERTIES FOR MIRAFI PET-SERIES REINFORCEMENT GEOTEXTILES BY GRI-GT7 AND NCMA GUIDELINES
DETERMINATION OF THE LONG TERM PROPERTIES FOR MIRAFI PET-SERIES REINFORCEMENT GEOTEXTILES BY GRI-GT7 AND NCMA GUIDELINES Prepared by: TenCate TM Geosynthetics North America 365 South Holland Drive Pendergrass,
More informationINSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMITTING A COMMERCIAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT APPLICATION
Permits will be processed only when ALL required information is provided Application MUST be accompanied by the following: Property address or road location with distance from nearest intersection. IT
More informationPRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS
PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS PRODUCT SPECIFICATION BUNKER PREPARATION Prior to installation of bunker liner, the Contractor shall insure that all bunker drains work properly. Drains which do not work shall be
More informationTION GUIDE ALLA T INS
INSTALLATION GUIDE TENSAR GEOGRIDS Easier installation makes the Sierra Slope Retention System a more affordable alternative to conventional retaining walls. The Sierra System owes its strength and durability
More informationInteraction Testing Report. 24 SF Units with Synteen Geogrids. Stone Strong Systems Lincoln, Nebraska
Interaction Testing Report 24 SF Units with Synteen Geogrids Stone Strong Systems Lincoln, Nebraska Prepared for: Stone Strong Systems 1620 South 70th Street Suite 105 Lincoln, Nebraska 68506 September
More information4.8. Subsurface Infiltration
4.8. Subsurface Infiltration Subsurface infiltration systems are designed to provide temporary below grade storage infiltration of stormwater as it infiltrates into the ground. Dry wells, infiltration
More informationProctor Compaction Testing
University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Nebraska Department of Transportation Research Reports Nebraska LTAP 5-2008 Proctor Compaction Testing Joshua Connelly Wayne
More information