Module 5: Channel and Slope Stability. Channel and Slope Protection. Upslope diversions Channel Protection. Slope Protection

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Module 5: Channel and Slope Stability. Channel and Slope Protection. Upslope diversions Channel Protection. Slope Protection"

Clarissa Atkinson
6 years ago
Views:

Massive Streambank Failure at New Outfall

Slope Stability Robert Pitt Department of

Slope Protection Some potential solutions

1 Massive Streambank Failure at New Outfall in a Suburban Area Module 5: Channel and Slope Stability Robert Pitt Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering University of Alabama Tuscaloosa, AL WI DNR photo Channel and Slope Protection Some potential solutions to stabilize streambanks. Upslope diversions Channel Protection Channel liners Check dams Slope Protection Roughening surface Erosion control mats

2 Slope Diversions Channel Lining

3 Check Dams Roughening Slopes while Compacting Ground

4 Gabions for Channel and Slope Protection Slope Protection Using Different Materials Coir Logs and Sprayed-on Mulch with Adhesive Rock and Asphalt for Shaded Areas

Channel Design Based on Allowable Velocity and Shear Stress The concepts of allowable velocity and allowable shear stress are closely linked.

Most allowable velocity charts also include slope categories for the different liner materials.

5 Channel Design Based on Allowable Velocity and Shear Stress The concepts of allowable velocity and allowable shear stress are closely linked. Shear stress is calculated based on water depth and channel slope. Velocity is affected by both slope and depth. Most allowable velocity charts also include slope categories for the different liner materials. Some allowable velocity charts also consider silt content (water carrying silt has a higher allowable velocity because its sediment carrying capacity is already reduced). Liner Texture Example Allowable Velocity and Shear Stress Values Manning s roughness Clear Water (diversions) Silty Water (on site and downslope) o RS Boundary Shear Stress (tractive force): o RS n V (ft/sec) o (lb/ft ) V (ft/sec) o (lb/ft ) Fine sand Firm loam Fine gravel Cobbles γ = specific weight of water (6.4 lbs/ft 3 ) R = hydraulic radius (flow depth is used for maximum shear stress calculations; for sheetflow conditions, the depth is equal to the hydraulic radius) S = channel slope Chow 1959

Example plot of allowable shear stress (unit tractive force) for cohesive materials.

¼ inch deep on a % slope: (6.4 lb/ft 3 )(0.01 ft)(0.0) = 0.06 lb/ft > 0.

6 Example plot of allowable shear stress (unit tractive force) for cohesive materials. Chow 1959 COE 1994 Example Allowable Tractive Forces Sheetflow: ¼ inch deep on a 10 % slope: (6.4 lb/ft 3 )(0.01 ft)(0.10) = 0.13 lb/ft >3.5 mm particles OK, for high slit content flow >5 mm particles OK, for clear flow Moderately compacted cohesive clays OK Sheetflow: ¼ inch deep on a % slope: (6.4 lb/ft 3 )(0.01 ft)(0.0) = 0.06 lb/ft > 0.1 mm particles OK, for all flows OK for all loose and more compacted cohesive clays Example Allowable Tractive Forces (cont.) Channel Flow: 18 inches deep on a 5 % slope: (6.4 lb/ft 3 )(1.5 ft)(0.05) = 4.7 lb/ft no natural lining material safe Channel Flow: 18 inches deep on a 1 % slope: (6.4 lb/ft 3 )(1.5 ft)(0.01) = 0.93 lb/ft >70 mm noncohesive material OK

Channel Design Steps for Maximum Permissible Velocity/Allowable Shear Stress Method 1.

. Calculate the hydraulic radius (R) using Manning s equation for these conditions. R 1.5

Calculate the required cross-sectional area (A) using the continuity equation and the design storm peak flow rate (Q): Q A V 4.

7 Channel Design Steps for Maximum Permissible Velocity/Allowable Shear Stress Method 1. Estimate Manning s roughness (n), the channel slope (S), and the maximum permissible velocity (V) for the channel.. Calculate the hydraulic radius (R) using Manning s equation for these conditions. R 1.5 Vn S Channel Design Steps for Maximum Permissible Velocity/Allowable Shear Stress Method (cont.) 3. Calculate the required cross-sectional area (A) using the continuity equation and the design storm peak flow rate (Q): Q A V 4. Calculate the corresponding wetted perimeter (P): A P R Channel Design Steps for Maximum Permissible Velocity/Allowable Shear Stress Method (cont.) 5. Calculate an appropriate channel base width (b) and depth (y) corresponding to a specific channel geometry (usually a trapezoidal channel having a slide slope of z:1). 5b. Chow s nomograph can be used to significantly shorten the calculation effort by using the following form of Manning s equation: AR 3 nq 1.49S 0.5 Chow s (1959) nomograph to determine normal depth for different channel geometries and flows:

8 Example Design of Stable Channel Noncolloidal alluvial silts channel lining, water transporting colloidal silts: Manning s roughness (n) = 0.00 Maximum permissible velocity (V) = 3.5 ft/sec Allowable shear stress is 0.15 lb/ft The previously calculated peak discharge (Q) = 13 ft 3 /sec The channel slope (S) = 1%, or 0.01 The hydraulic radius (R) using Manning s equation: 1.5 Vn R.49S ft The required cross-sectional area: Q A V ft Therefore, AR /3 = (3.7)(0.3) /3 = 1.7 and the wetter perimeter = A/R = 3.7/0.3 = 1 ft There are many channel options available, Side slope z Channel options that meet allowable velocity criterion: Bottom width b AR /3 /b 8/3 y/b Normal depth y Max shear stress ft Safety factor for shear As the channel becomes wide, the side slope has little effect on the normal depth and therefore on the shear stress. Even though all these channels meet the permissible channel velocity, only those approaching 5 feet wide also meet the allowable shear stress. Since the allowable shear stress is 0.15 lb/ft, the normal depth must be less than 0.4 ft (about 3 inches), requiring a relatively wide channel. Current practice is to design channel liners based on shear stress and not on allowable velocity, as it does a better job in predicting liner stability.

Channel Design using Reinforced Liners If a channel will have intermittent flows, it is common to use vegetated liners to increase channel stability.

Reinforced turf mat liner design should examine three phases: Original channel in unvegetated condition Channel in partially vegetated condition Channel in permanent condition with established

9 Channel Design using Reinforced Liners If a channel will have intermittent flows, it is common to use vegetated liners to increase channel stability. If channel will have perennial flows, then structural liners must be used. Reinforced turf mat liner design should examine three phases: Original channel in unvegetated condition Channel in partially vegetated condition Channel in permanent condition with established vegetation Sod placed along a drainage bottom, with grass seed along the edges Seeding along median strip swale of highway project Temporary Vegetation Plantings barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), noted for its early fall growth; oats (Avena) sativa L.), in areas of mild winters; mixtures of wheat, oats, barley, and rye (Secale cereale L.); field bromegrass (Bromus spp.); and ryegrasses (Lolium spp.). Bermudagrass is most widely used permanent grass in the sourthern US (for permanent plantings)

10 Channel matting failure is based on soil loss (usually maximum of 0.5 inch; greater amounts hinder the establishment of vegetation. Basic shear stress formula can be modified to predict the shear stress applied to the soil beneath a channel mat: ns e DS1 C f n e = effective shear stress exerted on soil beneath vegetation γ = specific weight of water (6.4 lbs/ft 3 ) D = the maximum flow depth in the cross section (ft) S = hydraulic slope (ft/ft) C f = vegetal cover factor (this factor is 0 for an unlined channel) n s = roughness coefficient of underlying soil n = roughness coefficient of vegetal components Cover Factor (C f ) (good uniform stands) Covers Tested 0.90 bermudagrass centipedegrass buffalograss kentucky bluegrass blue grama grass mixture weeping lovegrass yellow bluestem alfalfa lespedeza sericea common lespedeza sudangrass 50 Reference stem density (M), stem/ft Allowable effective stress for noncohesive soils Soil grain roughness for noncohesive soils

11 Standard VR-n curves for deep channel flows VR-n curve for different grasses, showing results for shallow flows; Univ. of Alabama tests (Kirby 003) Indoor Channel Trendlines in Comparision to Stillwater Curves USDA Stillwater, OK, tests Outdoor Swale Data 0.80 Manning's"n" Centipede Zoysia (multiply ft /sec by 0.09 to obtain m /sec) Retardance Classes ( A - E) A B C 0.0 Bluegrass D 0.10 E E E E E E+00 VR (m^/sec) Example Problem for the Selection of Roughness Coefficient for Grass-Lined Channels Determine the roughness value for a 10-year design storm of 70 ft 3 /sec ( m 3 /sec) in a grass-lined drainage channel having a slope of 0.05 ft/ft and a 4 foot (1. m) bottom width and 1:1 side slopes. The grass cover is expected to be in retardance group D. AR/3/b8/3 = 10.51/40.3 = 0.6 Long-term design, based on vegetated channel stability: use Q peak = Q 10year = 70 ft 3 /s ( m 3 /s) initially assume that n vegetated = 0.05 Determine the normal depth of flow: nq cfs 3 AR S AR /3 /b 8/3 = 10.51/40.3 = 0.6 With a 1:1 side slope trapezoidal channel, the ratio of y/b is 0.43, and the depth is 4(0.43) = 1.7 ft. The cross-sectional area = 9.7 ft The velocity = (70 ft 3 /sec)/(9.7 ft ) = 7. ft/sec P = 8.8 ft R = 9.7 ft /8.8 ft = 1.1 ft VR is therefore = (7. ft/sec)(1.1 ft) = 7.9 ft /sec From the VR-n curve, the new n is therefore 0.03 for retardance class D grass. The normal depth must be re-calculated: AR 3 nq 1.49S cfs

AR /3 /b 8/3 = 6.7/40.3 = 0.17 With a 1:1 side slope trapezoidal channel, the ratio of y/b is 0.34, and the depth is 4(0.34) = 1.4 ft.

95 ft VR is therefore = (9. ft/sec)(0.95 ft) = 8.7 ft /sec From the VR-n curve, the revised value of n is still close to 0.

4 lb/ft This is a relatively large value for shear stress, requiring reinforcement.

Channel Roughness Coefficients (n) Flow depth (ft) Manning s n (unvegetated) Slope length <3:1 3:1 to :1 <0.50 ft 0.055 (ft) < 0 ft 0.00014 0.

85 lb/ft Example for Matted Channel Liner Consider the following example: Calculated max. shear stress:.

12 AR /3 /b 8/3 = 6.7/40.3 = 0.17 With a 1:1 side slope trapezoidal channel, the ratio of y/b is 0.34, and the depth is 4(0.34) = 1.4 ft. The cross-sectional area = 7.6 ft The velocity = (70 ft 3 /sec)/(7.6 ft ) = 9. ft/sec P = 8.0 ft R = 7.6 ft /8.0 ft = 0.95 ft VR is therefore = (9. ft/sec)(0.95 ft) = 8.7 ft /sec From the VR-n curve, the revised value of n is still close to 0.03 The maximum shear stress (using normal depth instead of hydraulic radius) is therefore: γds= (6.4 lb/ft 3 ) (1.4 ft) 0.05 ft/ft) = 4.4 lb/ft This is a relatively large value for shear stress, requiring reinforcement. Example Specifications for Erosion Control Blanket (NAG S150BN Straw, 10 month life) RUSLE Conservation Coefficients (C) Slope Gradients (S) Channel Roughness Coefficients (n) Flow depth (ft) Manning s n (unvegetated) Slope length <3:1 3:1 to :1 <0.50 ft (ft) < 0 ft to ft to to > ft 0.01 >50 ft Max. permissible shear stress: 1.85 lb/ft Example for Matted Channel Liner Consider the following example: Calculated max. shear stress:.83 lb/ft, requiring a NAG P300 permanent mat. n s for the soil is n for the vegetated mat is 0.04 C f for the vegetated mat is 0.87 The permissible shear stress for the underlying soil is 0.08 lb/ft e The safety factor is therefore 0.08/0.053 = 1.5 and the channel lining system is expected to be stable.

Example of a permanent channel design, with a liner: n = 0.0 Q = 9 CFS S = 8% (0.08) One possible solution: AR 3 0.0 9 0.08 1.49 0.5 1.38 A = [(7.64+5)/] (0.44) =.78 ft V = Q/A = 9 ft 3 /sec/.

8 lb/ft which is relatively large (The permissible shear stress for the underlying soil is 0.08 lb/ft ) Another alternative design with a liner: A = [(5+9.)/] (0.7) = 4.97 ft P = 5 + (1.1) = 7.

13 Example of a permanent channel design, with a liner: n = 0.0 Q = 9 CFS S = 8% (0.08) One possible solution: AR A = [(7.64+5)/] (0.44) =.78 ft V = Q/A = 9 ft 3 /sec/.78 ft = 10.4 ft/sec R = A/P P = 5 + (3.16)(0.44) = 7.78 ft. R = A/P =.78 ft/7.78 ft. = 0.36 ft. τ = γrs = (6.4lb/ft 3 )(0.36 ft.)(0.08) = 1.8 lb/ft which is relatively large (The permissible shear stress for the underlying soil is 0.08 lb/ft ) Another alternative design with a liner: A = [(5+9.)/] (0.7) = 4.97 ft P = 5 + (1.1) = 7.4 ft R = A/P = 4.97/7.4 = 0.67 τ = γds = (6.4lb/ft 3 )(0.70 ft.)(0.08) = 3.49 lb/ft (design case using normal depth) V = Q/A = 9 ft 3 /sec/4.97 ft = 5.8 ft/sec Permanent C350 liner, 5 ft bottom width, z=3 side slope, and phase 3 vegetation plant stage (mature) n s = 0.016; C f = 0.87 phase 3 Effective shear stress on underlying soil: ns C 3.49lb / ft lb / ft e DS f n The permissible shear stress for the underlying soil is 0.08 lb/ft Channel Design using Concrete and Riprap Liner Materials A lined swale is a constructed channel with a permanent lining designed to carry concentrated runoff to a stable outlet. This practice applies where grass swales are unsuitable because of conditions such as steep channel grades, prolonged flow areas, soils that are too erodible or not suitable to support vegetation or insufficient space is available AL Handbook Even concrete-lined channels and pipes may fail Capacity graph for concrete flumes, depth of flow = 0.50 feet WI DNR photo Alabama Handbook

A riprap-lined swale is a natural or constructed channel with an erosion-resistant rock lining designed to carry concentrated runoff to a stable outlet.

Chutes by Robinson, Rice, and Kadavy. For swale slopes between % and 10%: d 50 = [q (S) 1.5 /4.75x10-3 ] 1/1.89 For swale slopes between 10% and 40%: d 50 = [q (S) 0.58 /3.93x10 - ] 1/1.

14 A riprap-lined swale is a natural or constructed channel with an erosion-resistant rock lining designed to carry concentrated runoff to a stable outlet. This practice applies where grass swales are unsuitable because of conditions such as steep channel grades, prolonged flow areas, soils that are too erodible or not suitable to support vegetation or insufficient space. Alabama Handbook Riprap-lined Swale Stable rock sizes, for rock lined swales having gradients between percent and 40 percent should be determined using the following formulas from Design of Rock Chutes by Robinson, Rice, and Kadavy. For swale slopes between % and 10%: d 50 = [q (S) 1.5 /4.75x10-3 ] 1/1.89 For swale slopes between 10% and 40%: d 50 = [q (S) 0.58 /3.93x10 - ] 1/1.89 d 50 = Particle size for which 50 % of the sample is finer, inch S = Bed slope, ft/ft q = Unit discharge, ft 3 /s/ft (Total discharge/bottom width) Size of Riprap Stones Weight (lbs) Mean Spherical Diameter (feet) Rectangular Shape Length Width, Height (feet) Graded Riprap Class Weight (lbs.) d 10 d 15 d 5 d 50 d 75 d

Check dams are small barriers or dams constructed across a swale, drainage ditch or areas of concentrated flow.

Some sediment will be trapped upstream from the check dams, but its volume will be insignificant and should not be considered in off-site sediment reduction.

5 Q = Outflow through the stone check dam (cfs) h = Ponding depth behind the check dam (ft) W = Width of the check dam (ft), not to be confused with the horizontal flow path length through the

5 3 3 ft / 15 ft 3 ft / 0.75 ft.5 3 ft 0.5 7.

15 Check dams are small barriers or dams constructed across a swale, drainage ditch or areas of concentrated flow. Check dams are to prevent or reduce erosion by lessening the gradient of the flow channel which reduces the velocity of storm water flows. Some sediment will be trapped upstream from the check dams, but its volume will be insignificant and should not be considered in off-site sediment reduction. Alabama Handbook Check Dams Flow Rates through Stone Check Dams Q h / 3 W L / D.5 L 0. 5 Q = Outflow through the stone check dam (cfs) h = Ponding depth behind the check dam (ft) W = Width of the check dam (ft), not to be confused with the horizontal flow path length through the check dam L = Horizontal flow path length through the check dam (ft) D = Average rock diameter in the check dam (ft) Q h = 3 ft L = 3 ft L / D h / 3 W.5 L W = 15 ft, D = 9 inches = 0.75 ft ft / 15 ft 3 ft / 0.75 ft.5 3 ft ft 3 / sec Example Design for Reinforced Grass-Lined Channels with Check Dams and Level Spreader Pads A new industrial site in Huntsville, AL, has several -acre individual building sites. Each of the sites will be served with a grass-lined channel that will carry site water to a larger swale system. The slopes of the channels vary from about 1 to 6.5%. The calculated peak flow from each construction site was calculated to be 16 ft 3 /sec (corresponding to the Huntsville, AL, 5 yr design storm of 6.3 inches for 4 hours). A grass-lined channel is to be designed for each site. The bare seed bed is assumed to have a hydraulic roughness of about

The seed bed has an allowable shear stress of about 0.05 lb/ft.

Therefore, a North American Green S75 mat was selected, having an

Slope Bare seed bed shear stress (lb/ft ) Unvegetated mat shear

of 0.05 lb/ft ) 1% 0.14 0.01 4. 3.1 3% 0.8 0.03. 4.8 5% 0.4 0.035 1.

4 Maximum velocity with mature vegetation (ft/sec) The check dams are

ft apart (or less) to ensure that the toes of the upstream check dams

16 The seed bed has an allowable shear stress of about 0.05 lb/ft. The calculated values for unprotected conditions are all much larger. Therefore, a North American Green S75 mat was selected, having an allowable shear stress of 1.55 lb/ft and a life of 1 months. Slope Bare seed bed shear stress (lb/ft ) Unvegetated mat shear stress, effect on soil (lb/ft ) Safety factor (allowable shear stress of 0.05 lb/ft ) 1% % % % Maximum velocity with mature vegetation (ft/sec) The check dams are assumed to be ft high to the maximum over-topping elevation in 3 ft deep channels. In channels with 5% slopes, the check dams would have to be about 40 ft apart (or less) to ensure that the toes of the upstream check dams were at the same, or lower, elevations as the overflows of the downstream dams. Similarly, the check dams in the 6.5% sloped channels would have to be no more than 30 ft apart. Slope Stability

Slope Stability Applied to Erosion Control The basic shear stress calculations can be applied to slopes, using the flow depth of the sheetflow Sheetflow flow

$) n is the sheet flow roughness coefficient for the slope surface, and s is the slope (as a fraction) The basic shear stress equation can be used to calculate the$ maximum shear stress expected on a slope: o ys Slope Stability Example Design storm peak flow rate (Q) =.

maximum shear stress expected on a slope: o ys Slope Stability Example Design storm peak flow rate (Q) =.

4 (vegetated with dense grass; would be only about 0.

shear stress condition). y 0.011 0.4 5 0. 1.490.5 033 ft 0.5 o 6.40.0330.5 0. 51 3 (about 0.

17 Slope Stability Applied to Erosion Control The basic shear stress calculations can be applied to slopes, using the flow depth of the sheetflow Sheetflow flow depth can be calculated using the Manning s equation: 3 5 qn y s y is the flow depth (in feet), q is the unit width flow rate (Q/W, the total flow rate, in ft 3 /sec, divided by the slope width, in ft.) n is the sheet flow roughness coefficient for the slope surface, and s is the slope (as a fraction) The basic shear stress equation can be used to calculate the maximum shear stress expected on a slope: o ys Slope Stability Example Design storm peak flow rate (Q) =. ft 3 /sec Slope width (W) = 00 ft Therefore the unit width peak flow = Q/W =. ft 3 /sec/00 ft = 0.11 ft /sec Slope roughness (n) = 0.4 (vegetated with dense grass; would be only about for an erosion control mat before vegetation establishment, using the established vegetation condition results in deeper water and therefore a worst case shear stress condition). y ft 0.5 o (about 0.4 inches) The corresponding maximum shear stress would therefore be: lb/ft For an ordinary firm loam soil, the Manning s roughness is 0.00 and the allowable shear stress is 0.15 lb/ft. Without a protective mat, the calculated maximum shear stress is substantially greater than the allowable shear stress for the soil. The effective shear stress underneath the mat would be: ns e 1 C 0.00 o f lb/ft n The safety factor would be about 1.5/0.067 =. Any mat with a Manning s n greater than about would be adequate for this example.

Checking Erosion Yield of Protected Slope The final erosion control mat selection must be based on the expected erosion rate for the protected slope. R = 350 (Birmingham, AL conditions) K = 0.

81)(1) = 1060 tons/acre/yr For a protected slope (C = 0.19, and n = 0.055 for a NAG S75 mat): Soil loss = (350)(0.8)(10.81)(0.19) = 01 tons/acre/yr Checking Erosion Yield of Protected Slope (cont.

5 inches per year to allowable plants to survive. Others have proposed a limit of 0.5 inches per year. This is about 4 tons/acre/year (still about 10X the typical USDA limit for agricultural operations).

037, based on the previous shear stress calculations.

18 Checking Erosion Yield of Protected Slope The final erosion control mat selection must be based on the expected erosion rate for the protected slope. R = 350 (Birmingham, AL conditions) K = 0.8 LS for slope length of 300 ft and slope of 5% = ft by 300 ft slope would have an area of 1.4 acres For a bare slope (C = 1): Soil loss = (350)(0.8)(10.81)(1) = 1060 tons/acre/yr For a protected slope (C = 0.19, and n = for a NAG S75 mat): Soil loss = (350)(0.8)(10.81)(0.19) = 01 tons/acre/yr Checking Erosion Yield of Protected Slope (cont.) The unprotected bare slope would lose about 6.3 inches of soil per year, while the protected slope would lose about 1. inches per year. The USDA uses a maximum loss rate of 0.5 inches per year to allowable plants to survive. Others have proposed a limit of 0.5 inches per year. This is about 4 tons/acre/year (still about 10X the typical USDA limit for agricultural operations). The maximum C value for this slope would therefore be about 0.039, requiring the selection of a more substantial erosion control mat. The minimum roughness n for this slope is 0.037, based on the previous shear stress calculations. North American Green Conservation Factors for Different Erosion Control Mats, for Different Slopes and Slope Lengths Slope length and gradient S75 S150 SC150 C15 S75BN S150BN CS150BN C15BN C350 P300 Length between 0 and 50 ft (6 to 15 m) S 3: S between 3: to :1 S : Length 50 ft (15 m) S 3: S between 3: to :1 S :

Treatment RUSLE Cover Factors (C) for Grasses Mulch rate (tons/acre) Slope (%) <6 weeks 1.5 to 6 months 6-1 months No mulching or -- all 1.00 1.00 1.00 seeding Seeded grass none all 0.70 0.10 0.

19 Treatment RUSLE Cover Factors (C) for Grasses Mulch rate (tons/acre) Slope (%) <6 weeks 1.5 to 6 months 6-1 months No mulching or -- all seeding Seeded grass none all < < < Organic and synthetic blankets and composite mats -- all Synthetic mats -- all = (6.4 lb/ft )(0.0 ft)(0.15) = 0.18 lb/ft qn y 1.49s o ys Example Slope Stability Calculation The total critical flow rate off this hillside was previously calculated to be 1. ft 3 /sec. The Manning s n of the soil (n s ) is ( 0.01)(0.05) 5 y 0.0 ft 0. 1in (0.15) = (6.4 lb/ft )(0.0 ft)(0.15) = 0.18 lb/ft 3 The allowable shear stress for the soils on this hillside is only 0.11 lb/ft, and a vegetated mat will therefore be needed. The mat needs to have an n of at least: ft n lb / Solving for n = Using RUSLE: R = 350/yr k = 0.8 LS =.5 (for 104 ft slope at 15%) R = (350)(0.8)(.5) = 45 tons/acre/year This corresponds to 45 ( ) = 1.45 inches per year. With a maximum allowable erosion loss of 0.5 inches per year, the C factor for the mat must be: 0.5/1.45 = 0.17 Many mats that have this C factor for this slope condition (all except S75). In this example, the selection of a mat having an n of 0.067, or greater will be difficult. Most mats are in the range of 0.0 to It will therefore be necessary to use filter fences, coir logs, or other methods to provide additional flow resistance to the flow on this slope. Alternatively, the slope length can be shortened with a bench and diversion.

Chemical Treatment of Exposed Soils These newly developed materials act by chemically combining small soil particles into larger discrete particles that are more effective in settling in ponds and in

Homework for Chapter 5 1) Identify several different slope categories on your construction evaluation site and propose suitable control practices for each type.

20 Chemical Treatment of Exposed Soils These newly developed materials act by chemically combining small soil particles into larger discrete particles that are more effective in settling in ponds and in channels. Polyacrylamide (PAM) is the most common chemical being sold now. Polyacrylamide used for erosion control should have a negative (anionic) molecular charge. Homework for Chapter 5 1) Identify several different slope categories on your construction evaluation site and propose suitable control practices for each type. Justify your selections with appropriate calculations. ) Design an appropriate diversion swale, or a main drainage swale for your evaluation site. Using the previously calculated flow rates, select a suitable channel lining, including the consideration of check dams. Justify your selections with appropriate calculations.

Module 5: Channel and Slope Protection Example Assignments

Module 5: Channel and Slope Protection Example Assignments A) Example Project Assignment on Slope and Swale Design North America Green Software Example (Erosion Control Materials Design Software) The following