Large-Scale Slope Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6459 modified) Hydromulch 2000 over Sandy Loam
|
|
- Grant Neal
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Large-Scale Slope Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6459 modified) of Hydromulch 2000 over Sandy Loam December 2009 Submitted to: AASHTO/NTPEP 444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 249 Washington, D.C Attn: Keith Platte, NTPEP kplatte@aashto.org Submitted by: TRI/Environmental, Inc Bee Caves Road Austin, TX C. Joel Sprague Project Manager
2 December 31, 2009 Mr. Keith Platte AASHTO/NTPEP 444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 249 Washington, D.C Subject: Large-scale Slope Testing of Hydromulch 2000 over Sandy Loam Dear Mr. Platte: This letter report presents the results for large-scale slope erosion tests performed on Hydromulch 2000 hydraulically-applied erosion control product (HECP) over sandy loam. Included are data developed for target rainfall intensities from 2 to 6 in/hr (5 to 15 cm/hr). All testing work was performed in general accordance with the ASTM D 6459, Standard Test Method for Determination of Rolled Erosion Control Product (RECP) Performance in Protecting Hillslopes from Rainfall-Induced Erosion modified as necessary to accommodate hydraulically-applied mulch. The product was allowed to cure on the slopes for approximately 48 hours prior to testing. Generated results were used to develop the following general cover factor (C-Factor) for the tested material: C-Factor Hydromulch2000@3000lbs/acre = 0.29 for cumulative R Factor < 231 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 Hydromulch 2000 HECP over Sandy Loam - Slope Erosion Testing for NTPEP December 31, SLOPE TESTING REPORT Hydromulch 2000 HECP over Sandy Loam TESTING EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURES Overview of Test and Apparatus TRI/Environmental, Inc.'s (TRI's) large-scale slope 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 reported herein was performed in accordance with ASTM D 6459 modified as necessary to accommodate hydraulically-applied mulch, on 3:1 slopes using loamy soil test plots measuring 40 ft long x 8 ft wide. The simulated rainfall was produced by ten rain trees arranged around the perimeter of each test slope. Each rain tree has four sprinkler heads atop a 15 ft riser pipe. The rainfall system has been calibrated prior to testing to determine the number of sprinkler heads and associated pressure settings necessary to achieve target rainfall intensities and drop sizes. The calibrated drop size distribution in this test had a 5 percent higher distribution of drops smaller than 1mm than is defined in the standard. This variation as shown in Appendix C is believed to have a negligible effect on the test result. The target rainfall intensities are 2, 4, and 6 in/hr and are applied in sequence for 20 minutes each. Three replicate test slopes covered by the same hydraulically-applied erosion control product (HECP) submitted were tested. The application rate of the HECP was 3000 lb/acre. The product was allowed to cure on the slopes for approximately 48 hours prior to testing. The erosion resistance provided by the product tested is obtained by comparing the protected slope results to control (bare soil) results. Tables and graphs of rainfall versus soil loss are generated from the accumulated data. Hydraulic Erosion Control Product (HECP) The following information and index properties were determined from the supplied products. Table 1. Tested Product Information & Index Properties Product Information and Index Property / Test Units Sampled Product Product Identification - Hydromulch 2000 Manufacturing Plant Location - Conover, NC Lot number of sample - 2 Bags Bags Bag Dry Organic Matter Pure Wood Fiber % 85 ± 3 Moisture % 12 ± 3 Hydro-Colloid Tackifier % 3 ± 0.5 Tensile Strength (ASTM D 6818 modified) lb/in 0.8 Tensile Elongation (ASTM D 6818 modified) % 3.2 Thickness (ASTM 6525 modified) mils 288 Light Penetration (ASTM 6567 modified) % cover 98.5 Water Absorption (ASTM 1117 / ECTC TASC 00197) % Wt Change 527 Mass / Unit Area (ASTM D 6566 modified) osy Note: Index specimens were made using the currently proposed ASTM procedure.
4 Test Soil Hydromulch 2000 HECP over Sandy Loam - Slope Erosion Testing for NTPEP December 31, The test soil used in the test plots had the following characteristics. 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 Sandy Loam Soil Classification USCS Sandy silty clay (ML-CL) Preparation of the Test Slopes The initial slope 12-inch (minimum) thick soil veneer is placed and compacted. Compaction is verified to be 90% (± 3%) of Standard Proctor density using ASTM D 1556 (sand cone method). Subsequently, the test slopes undergo a standard preparation procedure prior to each slope test. First, any rills or depressions resulting from previous testing are filled in with test soil and subject to heavy compaction. The entire test plot is then tilled to a depth not less than four inches. The test slope is then raked to create a slope that is smooth both side-to-side and top-tobottom. Finally, a steel drum roller is rolled down-and-up the slope 3 times proceeding from one side of the plot to the other. The submitted erosion control product is then installed using the spray technique acceptable to the client. For this testing, TRI applied the product to the slopes. Installation of Erosion Control Product on Test Slopes As noted, the submitted erosion control product was installed as directed by the client. For the tests reported herein, the Hydromulch 2000 was applied at the rate of 3000 lb/acre. The applied material was allowed to cure for approximately 48 hours prior to testing. Specific Test Procedure Immediately prior to testing, rain gauges are placed at the quarter points (i.e. 10, 20, 30 ft) on the slope. The slope is then exposed to sequential 20-minute rainfalls having target intensities of 2, 4, and 6 inches per hour. All runoff is collected during the testing. Additionally, periodic sediment concentration grab samples are taken and runoff rate measurements are made. Between rainfall intensities, the rainfall is stopped and rainfall depth is read in the three rain gauges, valves are adjusted to facilitate the subsequent rainfall intensity, and empty collection vessels are positioned to collect subsequent runoff. After allowing for sediments to settle, water is decanted from the collected runoff. The remaining solids are used to determine bulk soil loss. Bulk soil loss is measured by drying all collected sediments.
5 Hydromulch 2000 HECP over Sandy Loam - Slope Erosion Testing for NTPEP December 31, Figure 2. Typical Sampling Figure 1. Rainfall Testing Facility (set up for a control run) Figure 3. Typical Control Result Pictures of slope preparation are shown in Figure 4. Figure 4. Typical Prepared Soil Slope & HECP Application Pictures of the eroded slopes are shown in Figures 5 thru 7.
6 Hydromulch 2000 HECP over Sandy Loam - Slope Erosion Testing for NTPEP December 31, Figure 5a. Test Slope #1 At Beginning of 2 in/hr Event Figure 5b. Test Slope #1 At Beginning of 4 in/hr Event Figure 5c. Test Slope #1 Near End of 4 in/hr Event Figure 5d. Test Slope #1 Test Stopped At 8:30 into the 6 in/hr Event Figure 6a. Test Slope #2 At Beginning of 2 in/hr Event Figure 6b. Test Slope #2 Near End of 2 in/hr Event
7 Hydromulch 2000 HECP over Sandy Loam - Slope Erosion Testing for NTPEP December 31, Figure 6c. Test Slope #2 5 minutes into 4 in/hr Event Figure 6d. Test Slope #2 Test Stopped At 5:00 into the 6 in/hr Event Figure 7a. Test Slope #3 At Beginning of 2 in/hr Event Figure 7b. Test Slope #3 At End of 2 in/hr Event Figure 7c. Test Slope #3 Near End of 4 in/hr Event Figure 7d. Test Slope #3 Test Run to Completion of the 6 in/hr Event
8 TEST RESULTS Hydromulch 2000 HECP over Sandy Loam - Slope Erosion Testing for NTPEP December 31, Total soil loss and the associated actual rainfall depth measured 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 rainfall depth into an R-Factor and the total soil loss into soil loss per acre as typically used in the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation. In accordance with the test procedure, a test is stopped in the event of catastrophic soil loss, as determined by the lab. In this case the tests were stopped due to catastrophic slope failure in two of three test slopes during the 6 inch/hr rainfall event. An assumed end-of-test worst-case soil loss based on the control runs replaced the soil loss just prior to failure. This methodology is used to facilitate the development of a normalized cumulative graph of R-Factor versus C-Factor (R factor = total kinetic energy of the storm (E) times its maximum 30-minute Intensity (I)). The normalized cumulative R-Factor calculated for the target test events: 2 in/hr for 20 minutes + 4 in/hr for 20 minutes + 6 in/hr for 20 minutes, is R = 231. This normalized result facilitates product-toproduct comparison of test results at a common point of the storm event. Graphs of R-Factor versus C-Factor for the protected condition and Soil Loss versus C-Factor for the control condition are shown in Figures 8 and 9, respectively. Figure 8 includes the best regression line fit to the test data to facilitate the determination of the C-factor. Linear (R 2 =0.535), power (R 2 =0.399), and exponential (R 2 =0.708) fits were evaluated. Slope # & Product 1 Hydromulch Hydromulch Hydromulch 2000 Test # (run # - target intensity) Table 3. Summary Data Table Protected Slopes Intensity (in/hr) Runoff (gallons) Cumm. R- Factor Soil Loss (lbs / plot / event) Cumm. Soil Loss (Tons/Acre) Control Soil Loss at Cumm. R-Factor (Tons/Acre) Cumm. C- Factor * Worst-case if test completed n/a *Test stopped at 8:30 of the 6"/hr rainfall because of catastrophic soil loss. Data not used ** Worst case if test completed n/a **Test stopped at 5:00 of the 6"/hr rainfall because of catastrophic soil loss. Data not used Test completed with only localized failures. Using the test procedure and data evaluation technique described herein, the C-Factor shown in Table 4 was determined using the following equation: C = m C / 2.78 K where m C = slope of the protected soil loss regression line; and K = the soil erosivity determined from bare soil testing = m K / LSCP Where m K = slope of the bare soil loss regression line; LS = topographic factor = 2.78 for 8 x 40 ft slope; C = cover factor = 1.0 for bare soil; P = management practice factor = 1.0 for bare soil.
9 Hydromulch 2000 HECP over Sandy Loam - Slope Erosion Testing for NTPEP December 31, Table 4. Overall C-Factor Product C-Factor Calculation Hydromulch 3000 lbs/acre R = 231 C = e x C = e x C-Factor vs. R-Factor (HM 2000 on TRI-Loam; 3:1 Slope) in/hr: R = 231 C-Factor y = e x R 2 = R-Factor Figure 8. R-Factor vs. C-Factor Tested Product Soil Loss vs R-Factor (TRI-Loam; 3:1 Slope) Soil Loss (Tons/Acre) C= m / (2.78*K) K = m / (C*2.78) K = / (2.78*1.0) = y = x R 2 = The cummulative R- Factor calculated for the following events: 2 in/hr for 20 min + 4 in/hr for 20 min + 6 in/hr for 20 min, is R = 231and the associated soil loss is 57.9 tons/acre R - Factor Figure 9. R-Factor vs. Soil Loss Control Tests
10 Hydromulch 2000 HECP over Sandy Loam - Slope Erosion Testing for NTPEP December 31, 2009 Appendix APPENDIX A RECORDED DATA Test Record Sheets Sediment Concentration Data Runoff Data Soil Moisture Content Soil Loss Tables
11 Slope #: 1 DDRF Rainfall Testing SLOPE #1 Target Rain: 2 in/hr Sediment Concentration Grab Samples Followed by Runoff Rate Measurements # Time Date: 20-Nov-09 Start Rain: Sampling 3:00 PM End Rain: 3:20 PM 1 15:03 interval: 0:03 End Runoff: 3:20 PM 2 15:06 Product: Rain Time (min): Test Time (min): :09 Hydromulch 2000 Descr: lb/acre hydraulically applied mulch 4 15:12 Lot #: n/a Anchors: none Anchorage: none 5 15:15 TOP OF SLOPE 6 15:18 w c1 = 18.0% (circle "x" for open valves) Set valves to 10 psi. 7 d = 0.71 in x X x x 8 i = 2.13 in/hr P = 10 psi 9 A 10 x 11 B P = 10 psi X 12 x x 13 X P = 10 psi C x 14 x x 15 x D P = 10 psi X 12 x x 13 X P = 10 psi E x 14 x x 15 x F P = 10 psi X x x Runoff Rate Measurements Time to Collect 1 gal, x P = 10 psi G x # Time sec X x x H P = 10 psi x x X x P = 10 psi I x X x X J P = 10 psi x 6 X 7 X 8 d = 0.71 in 9 i = 2.13 in/hr Temp. 89 deg 10 w c3 = 17.0% Hum. % 11 d = 0.67 in 12 i = 2.01 in/hr Average Depth: 0.70 in. 13 w c2 = 18.8% Avg Rainfall Intensity: 2.09 in/hr 14 Notes: 0 mph breeze. Approx 7 gal collected
12 Slope #: 1 DDRF Rainfall Testing SLOPE #1 Target Rain: 4 in/hr Sediment Concentration Grab Samples Followed by Runoff Rate Measurements # Time Date: 20-Nov-09 Start Rain: Sampling 3:25 PM End Rain: 3:45 PM 1 15:27 interval: 0:02 End Runoff: 3:50 PM 2 15:29 Product: Rain Time (min): Test Time (min): :31 Hydromulch 2000 Descr: lb/acre hydraulically applied mulch 4 15:33 Lot #: n/a Anchors: none Anchorage: none 5 15:35 TOP OF SLOPE Set valves to 10 psi. 6 15:37 w c1 = 18.0% (circle "x" for open valves) 7 15:39 d = 1.46 in X X x x 8 15:41 i = 4.38 in/hr P = 10 psi 9 15:43 A 10 15:45 X 11 B P = 10 psi X 12 X x 13 X P = 10 psi C x 14 x X 15 x D P = 10 psi X 12 X x 13 X P = 10 psi E x 14 x X 15 x F P = 10 psi X x x Runoff Rate Measurements Time to Collect 1 x P = 10 psi G x # Time gal, sec X x X H P = 10 psi x x X X P = 10 psi I X X x X J P = 10 psi X X X d = 1.38 in i = 4.14 in/hr Temp. 80 deg w c3 = 17.0% Hum. % 11 d = 1.34 in 12 i = 4.02 in/hr Average Depth: 1.39 in. 13 w c2 = 18.8% Avg Rainfall Intensity: 4.18 in/hr 14 Notes: 0 mph breeze. Approx 40 gal collected
13 Slope #: 1 DDRF Rainfall Testing SLOPE #1 Target Rain: 6 in/hr Sediment Concentration Grab Samples Followed by Runoff Rate Measurements # Time Date: 20-Nov-09 Start Rain: Sampling 4:00 PM End Rain: 4:08 PM 1 16:02 interval: 0:02 End Runoff: 4:08 PM 2 16:04 Product: Rain Time (min): 8.50 Test Time (min): :06 Hydromulch 2000 Descr: lb/acre hydraulically applied mulch 4 16:08 Lot #: n/a Anchors: none Anchorage: none 5 16:10 TOP OF SLOPE 6 16:12 w c1 = 18.0% (circle "x" for open valves) 7 16:14 d = 0.86 in X X X x Set valves to 10 psi. 8 16:16 i = 6.07 in/hr P = 10 psi 9 16:18 A 10 16:20 X 11 B P = 10 psi X 12 X X 13 X P = 10 psi C x 14 X X 15 x D P = 10 psi X 12 X X 13 X P = 10 psi E x 14 X X 15 x F P = 10 psi X x X Runoff Rate Measurements Time to Collect 1 X P = 10 psi G x # Time Gallon, sec X x X H P = 10 psi X X X X P = 10 psi I X X X 5 X J P = 10 psi X 6 X 7 X 8 d = 0.84 in 9 i = 5.93 in/hr Temp. 73 deg 10 w c3 = 17.0% Hum. % 11 d = 0.84 in 12 i = 5.93 in/hr Average Depth: 0.85 in. 13 w c2 = 18.8% Avg Rainfall Intensity: 5.98 in/hr 14 Notes: 0 mph breeze. Approx 30 gal collected. Catastrophic slump at approx. 8:30. Rain stopped at 14 minutes / Collection ratio'd to 8.5 min
14 Slope #: 2 DDRF Rainfall Testing SLOPE #2 Target Rain: 2 in/hr Sediment Concentration Grab Samples Followed by Runoff Rate Measurements # Time Date: 20-Nov-09 Start Rain: 4:25 PM End Rain: 4:45 PM 1 16:28 Sampling interval: 0:03 End Runoff: 4:45 PM 2 16:31 Rain Time (min): Test Time (min): :34 Product: Lot #: Hydromulch 2000 n/a Descr: lb/acre hydraulically applied mulch 4 16:37 Anchors: none Anchorage: none 5 16:40 TOP OF SLOPE 6 16:43 w c1 = 17.1% (circle "x" for open valves) Set valves to 10 psi. 7 d = 0.71 in x x X x 8 i = 2.13 in/hr P = 10 psi 9 A 10 x 11 X P = 10 psi B 12 x x 13 x C P = 10 psi X 14 x x 15 X P = 10 psi D x 12 x x 13 x E P = 10 psi X 14 x x 15 X P = 10 psi F x x x Runoff Rate Measurements Time to Collect 1 x G P = 10 psi x # Time Gallon, sec x X x P = 10 psi H x X x x I P = 10 psi x x X x P = 10 psi J X 6 X 7 X 8 d = 0.71 in 9 i = 2.13 in/hr Temp. 73 deg 10 w c2 = 18.2% Hum. % 11 d = 0.78 in 12 i = 2.34 in/hr Average Depth: 0.73 in. 13 w c3 = 19.1% Avg Rainfall Intensity: 2.20 in/hr 14 Notes: 0 mph breeze from the. Approx 10 gal collected
15 Slope #: 2 DDRF Rainfall Testing SLOPE #2 Target Rain: 4 in/hr Sediment Concentration Grab Samples Followed by Runoff Rate Measurements # Time Date: 20-Nov-09 Start Rain: Sampling 4:55 PM End Rain: 5:15 PM 1 16:57 interval: 0:02 End Runoff: 5:25 PM 2 16:59 Rain Time (min): Test Time (min): :01 Product: Hydromulch 2000 Descr: lb/acre hydraulically applied mulch 4 17:03 Lot #: n/a Anchors: none Anchorage: none 5 17:05 TOP OF SLOPE Set valves to 10 psi. 6 17:07 w c1 = 17.1% X X x x 7 17:09 d = 1.18 in P = 10 psi 8 17:11 i = 3.54 in/hr A 9 17:13 X 10 17:15 X P = 10 psi B 11 x X 12 x C P = 10 psi X 13 X x 14 X P = 10 psi D x 15 x X 12 x E P = 10 psi X 13 x x 14 X P = 10 psi F x 15 X x x G P = 10 psi X Runoff Rate Measurements Time to Collect 1 x X # Time Gallon, sec x P = 10 psi H x X x X I P = 10 psi X x X X P = 10 psi J X X X d = 1.5 in i = 4.50 in/hr w c2 = 18.2% Temp. 67 deg d = 1.46 in Hum. % 11 i = 4.38 in/hr 12 w c3 = 19.1% Average Depth: 1.38 in. 13 Avg Rainfall Intensity: 4.14 in/hr 14 Notes: 0 mph breeze. Approx. 36 gal collected
16 Slope #: 2 DDRF Rainfall Testing SLOPE #2 Target Rain: 6 in/hr Sediment Concentration Grab Samples Followed by Runoff Rate Measurements # Time Date: 20-Nov-09 Start Rain: Sampling 5:30 PM End Rain: 5:35 PM 1 17:32 interval: 0:02 End Runoff: 5:35 PM 2 17:34 Rain Time (min): 5.00 Test Time (min): :36 Product: Lot #: Hydromulch 2000 n/a Descr: lb/acre hydraulically applied mulch 4 17:38 Anchors: none Anchorage: none 5 17:40 TOP OF SLOPE 6 17:42 w c1 = 17.1% (circle "x" for open valves) Set valves to 10 psi. 7 17:44 d = 0.55 in X X X x 8 17:46 i = 6.60 in/hr P = 10 psi 9 17:48 A 10 17:50 X 11 X P = 10 psi B 12 X X 13 x C P = 10 psi X 14 X X 15 X P = 10 psi D x 12 X X 13 x E P = 10 psi X 14 X X 15 X P = 10 psi F x X x Runoff Rate Measurements Time to Collect 1 x G P = 10 psi X # Time Gallon, sec x X X P = 10 psi H X X X 3 X I P = 10 psi X 4 X X 5 X P = 10 psi J X 6 X 7 X 8 d = 0.51 in 9 i = 6.12 in/hr Temp. 64 deg 10 w c2 = 18.2% Hum. % 11 d = 0.47 in 12 i = 5.64 in/hr Average Depth: 0.51 in. 13 w c3 = 19.1% Avg Rainfall Intensity: 6.12 in/hr 14 Notes: 0 mph breeze. Approx 15 gal collected. Catastrophic slump at approx. 5:
17 Slope #: 3 DDRF Rainfall Testing SLOPE #3 Target Rain: 2 in/hr Sediment Concentration Grab Samples Followed by Runoff Rate Measurements # Time Date: 20-Nov-09 Start Rain: 5:50 PM End Rain: 6:10 PM 1 17:53 Sampling interval: 0:03 End Runoff: 6:10 PM 2 17:56 Rain Time (min): Test Time (min): :59 Product: Lot #: Hydromulch 2000 n/a Descr: lb/acre hydraulically applied mulch 4 18:02 Anchors: none Anchorage: none 5 18:05 TOP OF SLOPE 6 18:08 w c1 = 19.2% (circle "x" for open valves) Set valves to 10 psi. 7 d = 0.67 in x X x x 8 i = 2.01 in/hr P = 10 psi 9 A 10 x 11 B P = 10 psi X 12 x x 13 X P = 10 psi C x 14 x x 15 x D P = 10 psi X 12 x x 13 X P = 10 psi E x 14 x x 15 x F P = 10 psi X x x Runoff Rate Measurements Time to Collect 1 x P = 10 psi G x # Time Gallon, sec X x x H P = 10 psi x x X x P = 10 psi I x 4 X x 5 X J P = 10 psi x 6 X 7 X 8 d = 0.67 in 9 i = 2.01 in/hr * Temp. 63 deg 10 w c3 = 18.2% Hum. % 11 d = 0.78 in 12 i = 2.34 in/hr Average Depth: 0.71 in. 13 w c2 = 18.8% Avg Rainfall Intensity: 2.12 in/hr 14 Notes: 0 mph breeze from the. Approx 5 gal collected. 15
18 Slope #: 3 DDRF Rainfall Testing SLOPE #3 Target Rain: 4 in/hr Sediment Concentration Grab Samples Followed by Runoff Rate Measurements # Time Date: 20-Nov-09 Start Rain: Sampling 6:20 PM End Rain: 6:40 PM 1 18:22 interval: 0:02 End Runoff: 6:45 PM 2 18:24 Rain Time (min): Test Time (min): :26 Product: Hydromulch 2000 Descr: lb/acre hydraulically applied mulch 4 18:28 Lot #: n/a TOP OF SLOPE Anchors: none Anchorage: none 5 18:30 Set valves to 10 psi. 6 18:32 w c1 = 19.2% (circle "x" for open valves) 7 18:34 d = 1.38 in X X x x 8 18:36 i = 4.14 in/hr P = 10 psi 9 18:38 A 10 18:40 X 11 B P = 10 psi X 12 X x 13 X P = 10 psi C x 14 x X 15 x D P = 10 psi X 12 X x 13 X P = 10 psi E x 14 x X 15 x F P = 10 psi X x x Runoff Rate Measurements Time to Collect 1 x P = 10 psi G x # Time Gallon, sec X x X H P = 10 psi x x X X P = 10 psi I X X x X J P = 10 psi X X X d = 1.3 in i = 3.90 in/hr Temp. 62 deg w c3 = 18.2% Hum. % 11 d = 1.34 in 12 i = 4.02 in/hr Average Depth: 1.34 in. 13 w c2 = 18.8% Avg Rainfall Intensity: 4.02 in/hr 14 Notes: 0 mph breeze. Approx 49 gal collected. Minor event at 18:00. 15
19 Slope #: 3 DDRF Rainfall Testing SLOPE #3 Target Rain: 6 in/hr Sediment Concentration Grab Samples Followed by Runoff Rate Measurements # Time Date: 20-Nov-09 Start Rain: Sampling 6:50 PM End Rain: 7:10 PM 1 18:52 interval: 0:02 End Runoff: 7:15 PM 2 18:54 Rain Time (min): Test Time (min): :56 Product: Lot #: Hydromulch 2000 n/a Descr: lb/acre hydraulically applied mulch 4 18:58 Anchors: none Anchorage: none 5 19:00 TOP OF SLOPE 6 19:02 w c1 = 19.2% (circle "x" for open valves) 7 19:04 d = 2.13 in X X X x Set valves to 11 psi. 8 19:06 i = 6.39 in/hr P = 10 psi 9 19:08 A 10 19:10 X 11 B P = 10 psi X 12 X X 13 X P = 10 psi C x 14 X X 15 x D P = 10 psi X 12 X X 13 X P = 10 psi E x 14 X X 15 x F P = 10 psi X x X Runoff Rate Measurements Time to Collect 1 X P = 10 psi G x # Time Gallon, sec X x X H P = 10 psi X X X X P = 10 psi I X X X X J P = 10 psi X X X d = 1.89 in i = 5.67 in/hr Temp. 60 deg w c3 = 18.2% Hum. % 11 d = 1.97 in 12 i = 5.91 in/hr Average Depth: 2.00 in. 13 w c2 = 18.8% Avg Rainfall Intensity: 5.99 in/hr 14 Notes: 0 mph breeze. Approx 240 gal collected. Minor slumping during test at 4:40 and 9:
20 Sample Number Test Time, minutes Total Weight, g Decanted Weight, g Dry Weight, g Slope #1 - Sediment Concentration Bottle Weight, g Dry Sediment Weight, mg Total Collected Water Wt., g Total Collected Volume of Water, l Sediment Concentration, mg/l Runoff Sampling Time Time to Collect 1 gal Associated Runoff, gal Associated Sediment Conc, mg/l Associated Solids Loss, lbs Solids Loss Prior to Failure, lbs 2.09 in/hr avg 20-Nov AVG = in/hr avg 0.00 Total Solids Lost: Nov AVG = in/hr avg Total Solids Lost: Nov AVG = Total Solids Lost: 0.05
21 Sample Number Test Time, minutes Total Weight, g Decanted Weight, g Dry Weight, g Slope #2 - Sediment Concentration Bottle Weight, g Dry Sediment Weight, mg Total Collected Water Wt., g Total Collected Volume of Water, l Sediment Concentration, mg/l Runoff Sampling Time Time to Collect 1 gal Associated Runoff, gal Associated Sediment Conc, mg/l Associated Solids Loss, lbs Solids Loss Prior to Failure, lbs 2.2 in/hr avg 20-Nov AVG = in/hr avg Total Solids Lost: Nov AVG = in/hr avg Total Solids Lost: Nov Total Solids Lost: 0.18
22 Sample Number Test Time, minutes Total Weight, g Decanted Weight, g Dry Weight, g Slope #3 - Sediment Concentration Bottle Weight, g Dry Sediment Weight, mg Total Collected Water Wt., g Total Collected Volume of Water, l Sediment Concentration, mg/l Runoff Sampling Time Time to Collect 1 gal Associated Runoff, gal Associated Sediment Conc, mg/l Associated Solids Loss, lbs Solids Loss Prior to Failure, lbs 2.12 in/hr avg 20-Nov AVG = in/hr avg Total Solids Lost: Nov AVG = in/hr avg Total Solids Lost: Nov AVG = Total Solids Lost: 80.15
23 20-Nov-09 Slope #1 Sample Number Test Time, minutes Time per Gallon, sec Interval Time, min Total Time, min Collection Mid-Time, min Runoff Rate, gal/min Associated Runoff, gal Cumulative Runoff, gal in/hr end Total Collected Runoff (approx) 4.18 in/hr end Total Collected Runoff (approx) 5.98 in/hr end Total Collected Runoff (approx)
24 20-Nov-09 Slope #2 Sample Number Test Time, minutes Time per Gallon, sec Interval Time, min Total Time, min Collection Mid-Time, min Runoff Rate, gal/min Associate d Runoff, gal Cumulative Runoff, gal 2.2 in/hr end Total Collected Runoff (approx) 4.14 in/hr end Total Collected Runoff (approx) 6.12 in/hr end Total Collected Runoff (approx)
25 20-Nov-09 Slope #3 Sample Number Test Time, minutes Time per Gallon, sec Interval Time, min Total Time, min Collection Mid-Time, min Runoff Rate, gal/min Associated Runoff, gal Cumulative Runoff, gal in/hr end Total Collected Runoff (approx) 4.02 in/hr end Total Collected Runoff (approx) 5.99 in/hr end Total Collected Runoff (approx)
26 WATER CONTENT DETERMINATION Run #: Slope No. SLOPE #1 SLOPE #2 SLOPE #3 Test Date: 20-Nov Nov Nov-09 Avg Moisture Content: 17.90% 18.13% 18.72% Location T-1 T-2 T-3 Wt. Of cup + wet soil, g Wt. Of cup + dry soil, g Wt. Of cup, g Wt. Of dry soil, g Wt. Of water, g Water Content, w% 18.0% 17.1% 19.2% Location M-1 M-2 M-3 Wt. Of cup + wet soil, g Wt. Of cup + dry soil, g Wt. Of cup, g Wt. Of dry soil, g Wt. Of water, g Water Content, w% 17.0% 18.2% 18.2% Location B-1 B-2 B-3 Wt. Of cup + wet soil, g Wt. Of cup + dry soil, g Wt. Of cup, g Wt. Of dry soil, g Wt. Of water, g Water Content, w% 18.8% 19.1% 18.8%
27 SLOPE #1 - Sediment Weights Total Dry Sediments: in/hr Collected Typ. TSS in Wt. Of pan + wet soil, lb Decanted Wt. Of pan + dry soil, lb Collected Runoff, lb/gal Wt. Of pan, lb Wt. Of dry soil, lb Wt. Of water, lb Water Content, w% 0.0 Total Wet Sediments, lb - Collected Sediments, gal % dry solids Dry Collected Sediments, lbs Total Dry Sediments: in/hr Collected Typ. TSS in Wt. Of pan + wet soil, lb Decanted Wt. Of pan + dry soil, lb Collected Runoff, lb/gal Wt. Of pan, lb Wt. Of dry soil, lb Wt. Of water, lb Water Content, w% 0.0 Total Wet Sediments, lb - Collected Sediments, gal % dry solids Dry Collected Sediments, lbs Total Dry Sediments: in/hr Collected Typ. TSS in Wt. Of pan + wet soil, lb Decanted Wt. Of pan + dry soil, lb Collected Runoff, lb/gal Wt. Of pan, lb Wt. Of dry soil, lb Wt. Of water, lb Water Content, w% 0.0 Total Wet Sediments, lb - Collected Sediments, gal % dry solids Dry Collected Sediments, lbs Add'l Soil Collected after Major Slumping at 8:30 Not Measured
28 SLOPE #2 - Sediment Weights Total Dry Sediments: in/hr Collected Typ. TSS in Wt. Of pan + wet soil, lb Decanted Wt. Of pan + dry soil, lb Collected Runoff, lb/gal Wt. Of pan, lb Wt. Of dry soil, lb Wt. Of water, lb Water Content, w% 0.0 Total Wet Sediments, lb - Collected Sediments, gal % dry solids Dry Collected Sediments, lbs Total Dry Sediments: in/hr Collected Typ. TSS in Wt. Of pan + wet soil, lb Decanted Wt. Of pan + dry soil, lb Collected Runoff, lb/gal Wt. Of pan, lb Wt. Of dry soil, lb Wt. Of water, lb Water Content, w% 0.0 Total Wet Sediments, lb - Collected Sediments, gal % dry solids Dry Collected Sediments, lbs Total Dry Sediments: in/hr Collected Typ. TSS in Wt. Of pan + wet soil, lb Decanted Wt. Of pan + dry soil, lb 0.15 Collected Runoff, lb/gal Wt. Of pan, lb Wt. Of dry soil, lb Wt. Of water, lb Water Content, w% 0.0 Total Wet Sediments, lb - % dry solids Dry Collected Sediments, lbs Add'l Soil Collected after Major Slumping at 5:00 Collected Sediments, gal Not Measured
29 SLOPE #3 - Sediment Weights Total Dry Sediments: in/hr Collected Typ. TSS in Wt. Of pan + wet soil, lb Decanted Wt. Of pan + dry soil, lb Collected Runoff, lb/gal Wt. Of pan, lb Wt. Of dry soil, lb Wt. Of water, lb Water Content, w% 0.0 Total Wet Sediments, lb - Collected Sediments, gal % dry solids Dry Collected Sediments, lbs Total Dry Sediments: in/hr Collected Typ. TSS in Wt. Of pan + wet soil, lb Decanted Wt. Of pan + dry soil, lb 2.55 Collected Runoff, lb/gal Wt. Of pan, lb Wt. Of dry soil, lb Wt. Of water, lb Water Content, w% 0.0 Total Wet Sediments, lb - Collected Sediments, gal % dry solids Dry Collected Sediments, lbs Total Dry Sediments: in/hr Collected Typ. TSS in Wt. Of pan + wet soil, lb Decanted Wt. Of pan + dry soil, lb 78.3 Collected Runoff, lb/gal Wt. Of pan, lb 1.2 Wt. Of dry soil, lb Wt. Of water, lb Water Content, w% 0.0 Total Wet Sediments, lb - Collected Sediments, gal % dry solids Dry Collected Sediments, lbs No Major Slumping
30 Hydromulch 2000 HECP over Sandy Loam - Slope Erosion Testing for NTPEP December 31, 2009 Appendix APPENDIX B TEST SOIL Test Soil Grain Size Distribution Curve Compaction Curves Veneer Soil Compaction Verification
31 November ASTM D 6459 Target Loam Plasticity (ASTM D 4318) Liquid Limit: 41 Plastic Limit: 33 Plastic Index: 8 Soil classifies as a sandy silty clay (ML-CL) in accordance with ASTM D 2487 Percent Finer DDRF ASTM D 6459 Blended Test Soil Particle Size (mm)
32 November 2009 Proctor Compaction Test 130 Sample No.: DDRF Blended Test Soil 125 Test Method: ASTM D Method A Maximum Dry Density (pcf): Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%): Moisture Content (%)
33 Compaction Worksheet ASTM D 1556 Calibration Date: 8/16/2009 Sand Used: Pool Filter Sand Volume Measure: Liquid Volume, V m (cm 3 ): 425 Wt. of Sand to Fill Known Volume: Total Wt (g) Pan Wt (g) Net Wt (g) Trial #1 (g) Trial #2 (g) Trial #3 (g) W a (g) Density of Sand, ɣ sand (g/cm 3 ) = W a / V m = 1.53 Wt. of Sand to Fill Cone: Total Wt (g) Cone Wt (g) Net Wt (g) Trial #1 (g) Trial #2 (g) Trial #3 (g) Wt. of Sand in Cone (g): Field Data Date: 11/4/2009 Soil Data: Wt. of Wet Soil + Pan (g) Wt. of Dry Soil + Pan (g) Wt. of Pan (g) 14.5 Wt. of Wet Soil, W' (g) Wt. of Dry Soil (g) Wt. of Water (g) Water Content, w (%) Volume Data: Sand Used: Pool Filter Sand Unit Wt. of Sand, ɣ sand (g/cm 3 ) = 1.53 Wt. of Jug & Cone Before (g) = Wt. of Jug & Cone After (g) = Wt. of Sand Used (g) = Wt. of Sand in Cone (g) = Wt. of Sand in Hole, W (g) = Volume of hole, V h (cm 3 ) = W / ɣ sand = Density Calculation: Wet density, ɣ wet = W' / V h (kn/m 3 ) = 1.83 Wet density, ɣ wet = W' / V h (lb/ft 3 ) = Dry density, ɣ dry = ɣ wet / [1 + w] (kn/m 3 ) = 1.54 Wet density, ɣ wet = W' / V h (lb/ft 3 ) = Max Std. Proctor Dry density (kn/m 3 ) = Opt. Moisture via Std. Proctor density (%) = Compaction as % of Std. Proctor = 92.3%
34 Hydromulch 2000 HECP over Sandy Loam - Slope Erosion Testing for NTPEP December 31, 2009 Appendix APPENDIX C RAINFALL DATA Raindrop Size Distribution Rainfall Calibration
35 50.00 Raindrop Size Distribution July % of Raindrops by Mass mm mm mm mm mm Rainfall Intensity, in/hr
36 TRI/Environmental, Inc. A Texas Research International Comp DDRF Rainfall Calibration Slope 1: 2 in/hr Rainfall (target) Date: 22-Jul-09 Start Time: 3:00 PM End Time: 3:15 PM Test Time: min. (circle "x" for open valves) TOP OF SLOPE x x X x P = 10 psi A x d = 0.25 in 1 2 d = in X P = 10 psi i = 1.00 in/hr B i = 1.50 in/hr x d = 0.5 in 3 4 d = 0.5 in x x i = 2.00 in/hr C i = 2.00 in/hr P = 10 psi X x d = 0.5 in 5 6 d = 0.5 in x X P = 10 psi i = 2.00 in/hr D i = 2.00 in/hr x x d = 0.45 in 7 8 d = 0.55 in x x i = 1.80 in/hr E i = 2.20 in/hr P = 10 psi x x d = 0.5 in 9 10 d = 0.5 in X X P = 10 psi i = 2.00 in/hr F i = 2.00 in/hr x x d = 0.5 in d = 0.5 in x x i = 2.00 in/hr G i = 2.00 in/hr P = 10 psi x x d = 0.55 in d = 0.5 in X xp = 10 psi i = 2.20 in/hr H i = 2.00 in/hr x X d = 0.5 in d = 0.5 in x x i = 2.00 in/hr I i = 2.00 in/hr P = 10 psi x x d = in d = 0.5 in X xp = 10 psi i = 2.50 in/hr J i = 2.00 in/hr X X d = 0.25 in d = 0.5 in X i = 1.00 in/hr i = 2.00 in/hr Approx. Bottom Catch: 95 gal Average Wind: 0 mph Average Depth: 0.48 in. Average Rainfall Intensity: 1.91 in/hr Christiansen Uniformity Coefficient: 88
37 TRI/Environmental, Inc. A Texas Research International Com DDRF Rainfall Calibration Slope 1: 4 in/hr Rainfall (target) Date: 22-Jul-09 Start Time: 4:00 PM End Time: 4:15 PM Test Time: min. (circle "x" for open valves) TOP OF SLOPE x x X X P = 10 psi A X d = in 1 2 d = 1.00 in X P = 10 psi i = 3.50 in/hr B i = 4.00 in/hr x d = 1.00 in 3 4 d = 1.00 in X x i = 4.00 in/hr C i = 4.00 in/hr P = 10 psi X X d = 1.00 in 5 6 d = 1.00 in x X P = 10 psi i = 4.00 in/hr D i = 4.00 in/hr x x d = 1.25 in 7 8 d = 1.00 in X x i = 5.00 in/hr E i = 4.00 in/hr P = 10 psi X x d = 1.25 in 9 10 d = 1.00 in x x P = 10 psi i = 5.00 in/hr F i = 4.00 in/hr x X d = 1.25 in d = in x X i = 5.00 in/hr G i = 3.50 in/hr P = 10 psi x x d = in d = 1.00 in X x P = 10 psi i = 4.50 in/hr H i = 4.00 in/hr X X d = 0.75 in d = 1.00 in x X i = 3.00 in/hr I i = 4.00 in/hr P = 10 psi X x d = 0.75 in d = in X X P = 10 psi i = 3.00 in/hr J i = 3.50 in/hr X X d = 0.5 in d = in X i = 2.00 in/hr i = 3.50 in/hr Approx. Bottom Catch: 190 gal Average Wind: 0 mph Average Depth: 0.97 in. Average Rainfall Intensity: 3.88 in/hr Christiansen Uniformity Coefficient: 87
38 TRI/Environmental, Inc. A Texas Research International Com DDRF Rainfall Calibration Slope 1: 6 in/hr Rainfall (target) Date: 22-Jul-09 Start Time: 5:00 PM End Time: 5:15 PM Test Time: min. (circle "x" for open valves) TOP OF SLOPE x X X X P = 10 psi A X d = 1.25 in 1 2 d = 1.4 in X P = 10 psi i = 5.00 in/hr B i = 5.60 in/hr X d = 1.5 in 3 4 d = in X x i = 6.00 in/hr C i = 5.50 in/hr P = 10 psi X X d = 1.75 in 5 6 d = 1.4 in X X P = 10 psi i = 7.00 in/hr D i = 5.60 in/hr x X d = 1.65 in 7 8 d = 1.45 in X x i = 6.60 in/hr E i = 5.80 in/hr P = 10 psi X X d = in 9 10 d = 1.55 in X X P = 10 psi i = 7.50 in/hr F i = 6.20 in/hr x X d = 1.75 in d = in x x i = 7.00 in/hr G i = 4.50 in/hr P = 10 psi X x d = 1.65 in d = 2.00 in X X P = 10 psi i = 6.60 in/hr H i = 8.00 in/hr X X d = 1.45 in d = 1.5 in X X i = 5.80 in/hr I i = 6.00 in/hr P = 10 psi X X d = 1.35 in d = 1.5 in X X P = 10 psi i = 5.40 in/hr J i = 6.00 in/hr X X d = in d = 1.25 in X i = 3.50 in/hr i = 5.00 in/hr Approx. Bottom Catch: 290 gal Average Wind: 0 mph Average Depth: 1.48 in. Average Rainfall Intensity: 5.93 in/hr Christiansen Uniformity Coefficient: 87
39 TRI/Environmental, Inc. A Texas Research International Com DDRF Rainfall Calibration Slope 2: 2 in/hr Rainfall (target) Date: 22-Jul-09 Start Time: 6:00 PM End Time: 6:15 PM Test Time: min. (circle "x" for open valves) TOP OF SLOPE x x X x P = 10 psi A d = 0.5 in 1 2 d = 0.5 in x i = 2.00 in/hr B i = 2.00 in/hr P = 10 psi X x d = 0.55 in 3 4 d = 0.75 in x X P = 10 psi i = 2.20 in/hr C i = 3.00 in/hr x x d = 0.55 in 5 6 d = 0.65 in x x i = 2.20 in/hr D i = 2.60 in/hr P = 10 psi X x d = 0.5 in 7 8 d = 0.55 in x X P = 10 psi i = 2.00 in/hr E i = 2.20 in/hr x x d = 0.5 in 9 10 d = 0.5 in x x i = 2.00 in/hr F i = 2.00 in/hr P = 10 psi x x d = 0.5 in d = 0.5 in X x P = 10 psi i = 2.00 in/hr G i = 2.00 in/hr x X d = 0.5 in d = 0.5 in x x i = 2.00 in/hr H i = 2.00 in/hr P = 10 psi x x d = 0.5 in d = 0.5 in X x P = 10 psi i = 2.00 in/hr I i = 2.00 in/hr x X d = 0.45 in d = 0.5 in x X i = 1.80 in/hr J i = 2.00 in/hr P = 10 psi x d = 0.5 in d = 0.5 in X i = 2.00 in/hr i = 2.00 in/hr X Approx. Bottom Catch: 105 gal Average Wind: 0 mph Average Depth: in. Average Rainfall Intensity: 2.1 in/hr Christiansen Uniformity Coefficient: 92
40 TRI/Environmental, Inc. A Texas Research International Com DDRF Rainfall Calibration Slope 2: 4 in/hr Rainfall (target) Date: 22-Jul-09 Start Time: 6:30 PM End Time: 6:45 PM Test Time: min. (circle "x" for open valves) TOP OF SLOPE x x X X P = 10 psi A d = 0.95 in 1 2 d = 0.95 in X i = 3.80 in/hr B i = 3.80 in/hr P = 10 psi X X d = 1 in 3 4 d = 1.5 in x X P = 10 psi i = 4.00 in/hr C i = 6.00 in/hr x x d = 1 in 5 6 d = 1.25 in X x i = 4.00 in/hr D i = 5.00 in/hr P = 10 psi X X d = 1 in 7 8 d = 1 in x X P = 10 psi i = 4.00 in/hr E i = 4.00 in/hr x x d = in 9 10 d = 1 in x x i = 4.50 in/hr F i = 4.00 in/hr P = 10 psi x x d = in d = 1 in X x P = 10 psi i = 4.50 in/hr G i = 4.00 in/hr X X d = 1 in d = in x X i = 4.00 in/hr H i = 4.50 in/hr P = 10 psi x x d = 1 in d = 1 in X X P = 10 psi i = 4.00 in/hr I i = 4.00 in/hr X X d = 0.95 in d = 1 in x X i = 3.80 in/hr J i = 4.00 in/hr P = 10 psi X d = 0.95 in d = 0.75 in X i = 3.80 in/hr i = 3.00 in/hr X Approx. Bottom Catch: 205 gal Average Wind: 0 mph Average Depth: in. Average Rainfall Intensity: in/hr Christiansen Uniformity Coefficient: 91
41 TRI/Environmental, Inc. A Texas Research International Com DDRF Rainfall Calibration Slope 2: 6 in/hr Rainfall (target) Date: 22-Jul-09 Start Time: 7:00 PM End Time: 7:15 PM Test Time: min. (circle "x" for open valves) TOP OF SLOPE x X X X P = 10 psi A d = 1.5 in 1 2 d = in X i = 6.00 in/hr B i = 5.50 in/hr P = 10 psi X X d = 1.55 in 3 4 d = in X X P = 10 psi i = 6.20 in/hr C i = 8.50 in/hr x X d = 1.75 in 5 6 d = 2 in X x i = 7.00 in/hr D i = 8.00 in/hr P = 10 psi X X d = in 7 8 d = in X X P = 10 psi i = 7.50 in/hr E i = 5.50 in/hr x X d = 1.5 in 9 10 d = 1.5 in x x i = 6.00 in/hr F i = 6.00 in/hr P = 10 psi X x d = 1.55 in d = 1.5 in X X P = 10 psi i = 6.20 in/hr G i = 6.00 in/hr X X d = 1.5 in d = 1.5 in x X i = 6.00 in/hr H i = 6.00 in/hr P = 10 psi X X d = 1.5 in d = 1.5 in X X P = 10 psi i = 6.00 in/hr I i = 6.00 in/hr X X d = 1.45 in d = 1.5 in X X i = 5.80 in/hr J i = 6.00 in/hr P = 10 psi X d = 1.25 in d = 1.00 in X i = 5.00 in/hr i = 4.00 in/hr X Approx. Bottom Catch: 305 gal Average Wind: 0 mph Average Depth: 1.54 in. Average Rainfall Intensity: 6.16 in/hr Christiansen Uniformity Coefficient: 90
42 TRI/Environmental, Inc. A Texas Research International Com DDRF Rainfall Calibration Slope 3: 2 in/hr Rainfall (target) Date: 23-Jul-09 Start Time: 10:00 AM End Time: 10:15 AM Test Time: min. (circle "x" for open valves) TOP OF SLOPE x x X X P = 10 psi A d = 0.5 in 1 2 d = 0.5 in X i = 2.00 in/hr B i = 2.00 in/hr P = 10 psi X x d = 0.5 in 3 4 d = 0.5 in x X P = 10 psi i = 2.00 in/hr C i = 2.00 in/hr x x d = 0.5 in 5 6 d = 0.5 in x x i = 2.00 in/hr D i = 2.00 in/hr P = 10 psi X x d = 0.5 in 7 8 d = 0.5 in x X P = 10 psi i = 2.00 in/hr E i = 2.00 in/hr x x d = 0.45 in 9 10 d = 0.5 in x x i = 1.80 in/hr F i = 2.00 in/hr P = 10 psi x x d = 0.55 in d = 0.5 in X x P = 10 psi i = 2.20 in/hr G i = 2.00 in/hr x X d = 0.55 in d = in x x i = 2.20 in/hr H i = 2.50 in/hr P = 10 psi x x d = 0.5 in d = 0.5 in X x P = 10 psi i = 2.00 in/hr I i = 2.00 in/hr x X d = 0.5 in d = 0.5 in x X i = 2.00 in/hr J i = 2.00 in/hr P = 10 psi x d = in d = 0.25 in X i = 1.50 in/hr i = 1.00 in/hr X Approx. Bottom Catch: 95 gal Average Wind: 0 mph Average Depth: 0.49 in. Average Rainfall Intensity: 1.96 in/hr Christiansen Uniformity Coefficient: 92
Large-Scale Slope Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6459 modified) Flexterra Ultra over Sandy Loam
Large-Scale Slope Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6459 modified) of Flexterra Ultra over Sandy Loam December 2009 Submitted to: AASHTO/NTPEP 444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 249 Washington, D.C. 20001 Attn:
More informationLarge-Scale Slope Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6459) East Coast Erosion Blanket ECC-2B, Double Net Coconut Fiber Blanket over Sandy Loam
Large-Scale Slope Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6459) of East Coast Erosion Blanket ECC-2B, Double Net Coconut Fiber Blanket over Sandy Loam February 2010 Submitted to: AASHTO/NTPEP 444 North Capitol Street,
More informationLarge-Scale Slope Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6459 modified) Central Fiber s Second Nature Wood Fiber PLUS HECP and Enviro-Gold PLUS HECP over Sandy Loam
Large-Scale Slope Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6459 modified) of Central Fiber s Second Nature Wood Fiber PLUS HECP and Enviro-Gold PLUS HECP over Sandy Loam May 2015 Submitted to: AASHTO/NTPEP 444 North Capitol
More informationLarge-Scale Slope Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6459) US Erosion Control Products US-2S, Double Net Straw Blanket over Loam
Large-Scale Slope Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6459) of US Erosion Control Products US-2S, Double Net Straw Blanket over Loam June 2012 Submitted to: AASHTO/NTPEP 444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 249 Washington,
More informationLarge-Scale Slope Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6459) East Coast Erosion Control s ECS-2, Double Net Straw Blanket over Loam
Large-Scale Slope Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6459) of East Coast Erosion Control s ECS-2, Double Net Straw Blanket over Loam January 2014 Submitted to: AASHTO/NTPEP 444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 249
More informationLarge-Scale Slope Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6459) Winters Excelsior s Straw Bio, Double Biodegradable Net Straw Blanket over Loam
Large-Scale Slope Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6459) of Winters Excelsior s Straw Bio, Double Biodegradable Net Straw Blanket over Loam June 2014 Submitted to: AASHTO/NTPEP 444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite
More informationLarge-Scale Slope Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6459) American Excelsior s AEC Premier Straw Double Net FibreNet, Erosion Control Blanket (ECB) over Loam
Large-Scale Slope Erosion Testing (ASTM D 6459) of American Excelsior s AEC Premier Straw Double Net FibreNet, Erosion Control Blanket (ECB) over Loam November 2016 Submitted to: AASHTO/NTPEP 444 North
More informationLarge-Scale Sediment Retention Device Testing (ASTM D 7351) SedCatch Sediment Basket Inlet Filter Exposed to 6% Sediment Load
Large-Scale Sediment Retention Device Testing (ASTM D 7351) of SedCatch Sediment Basket Inlet Filter Exposed to 6% Sediment Load February 2010 Submitted to: SedCatch Environmental Products 8380 Point O
More informationLarge-Scale Sediment Retention Device Testing (ASTM D 7351) SedCatch Sediment Basket Inlet Filter Exposed to 1.5% Sediment Load
Large-Scale Sediment Retention Device Testing (ASTM D 7351) of SedCatch Sediment Basket Inlet Filter Exposed to 1.5% Sediment Load February 2010 Submitted to: SedCatch Environmental Products 8380 Point
More informationEVALUATING SEDIMENT BARRIERS
EVALUATING SEDIMENT BARRIERS Presented at IECA 2014, Nashville, TN C. Joel Sprague, P.E. TRI/Environmental, Inc. PO Box 9192, Greenville, SC 29604 Phone: 864/242-2220; Fax: 864/242-3107; jsprague@tri-env.com
More informationWhat Is Water Erosion? Aren t they the same thing? What Is Sediment? What Is Sedimentation? How can Sediment Yields be Minimized?
Jerald S. Fifield, Ph.D. CISEC HydroDynamics Incorporated Parker, CO 303-841-0377 Aren t they the same thing? What Is Sediment? Soil particles deposited or suspended in water or air The process of depositing
More informationStone Outlet Sediment Trap
3.12 Sediment Control Description: A stone outlet sediment trap is a small detention area formed by placing a stone embankment with an integral stone filter outlet across a drainage swale for the purpose
More informationSediment Capture in Pervious Concrete Pavement tsystems: Effects on Hydrological Performance and Suspended Solids
Concrete Sustainability Conference April 14 th 2010, Tempe, AZ Sediment Capture in Pervious Concrete Pavement tsystems: Effects on Hydrological l Performance and Suspended Solids Discharge Luis A. Mata,
More information**Temporary Erosion Control**
Construction operations And methods **Temporary Erosion Control** The test will more than likely just have a basic word problem dealing with Erosion control, if it has anything on the test. So just review,
More informationTPDES: Soil, Erosion and Sedimentation Methods
SAWS TPDES: Soil, Erosion and Sedimentation Methods Philip Handley Supervisor-Resource Protection & Compliance August 25, 2014 TPDES: Soil, Erosion and Sedimentation Methods Soil Common term: Dirt Common
More informationDrivable Grass Report for Hydraulic Performance Testing
Drivable Grass Report for Hydraulic Performance Testing Prepared for Soil Retention Products, Inc. Prepared by Michael D. Turner Amanda L. Cox Christopher I. Thornton March 2011 Colorado State University
More informationProject: ITHACA-TOMPKINS REGIONAL AIRPORT EXPANSION Project Location: ITHACA, NY Project Number: 218-34 Key to Soil Symbols and Terms TERMS DESCRIBING CONSISTENCY OR CONDITION COARSE-GRAINED SOILS (major
More informationMr. Michael Malone CPS Energy 145 Navarro Street San Antonio, Texas Project No
January 17, 2018 Mr. Michael Malone 145 Navarro Street San Antonio, Texas 78205 Project No. 0337367 Environmental Resources Management CityCentre Four 840 West Sam Houston Pkwy N. Suite 600 Houston, Texas
More informationCONSTRUCTION MATERIALS
CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS T E C H N O L O G I E S PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT FOR Southern Manufacturing Division of Accord Industries IN ACCORDANCE WITH FLORIDA BUILDING CODE (HIGH VELOCITY HURRICANE ZONES)
More informationLaboratory #5 ABE 325 Erosion Processes Laboratory
Laboratory #5 ABE 325 Erosion Processes Laboratory Objective: To better understand the process of rill erosion and to understand the interaction between flow rate, sediment yield, slope, and a soil additive.
More informationErosion and Sedimentation Basics
Erosion and Sedimentation Basics Coastal San Luis Resource Conservation District G.W. Bates, PE, CPESC Outline: 1. Terms & Concepts 2. Causes of Erosion 3. The Erosion/Sedimentation Process 4. Erosion
More informationUNIVERSITY OF BOLTON WESTERN INTERNATIONAL COLLEGE FZE. BEng (HONS) IN CIVIL ENGINEERING SEMESTER ONE EXAMINATION 2016/2017 GROUND AND WATER STUDIES 1
OCD59 UNIVERSITY OF BOLTON WESTERN INTERNATIONAL COLLEGE FZE BEng (HONS) IN CIVIL ENGINEERING SEMESTER ONE EXAMINATION 2016/2017 GROUND AND WATER STUDIES 1 MODULE NO: CIE4009 Date: Saturday 14 January
More informationProcedure for Determining Near-Surface Pollution Sensitivity
Procedure for Determining Near-Surface Pollution Sensitivity Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Division of Ecological and Water Resources County Geologic Atlas Program March 2014 Version 2.1 I.
More informationSprinkler Irrigation
Sprinkler Irrigation Definition Pressurized irrigation through devices called sprinklers Sprinklers are usually located on pipes called laterals Water is discharged into the air and hopefully infiltrates
More informationDr. L. I. N. de Silva. Student Name Registration Number: Assessed By: Lecturers Remarks
Module - CE 2042 Soil Mechanics and Geology-1 Assignment Tests for Particle Size Distribution Analysis Marks 10% Learning Ability to conduct particle size distribution analysis of soils Outcome Ability
More informationErosion. changing landforms. Purpose. Process Skills. Background. Time 1 1 ½ hours Grouping Pairs, small groups, or class.
Purpose To demonstrate how several factors affect the rate of erosion. Process Skills Observe, Measure, Collect data, Interpret data, Form a hypothesis, Make a model, Identify and control variables, Draw
More informationStormwater Guidelines and Case Studies. CAHILL ASSOCIATES Environmental Consultants West Chester, PA (610)
Stormwater Guidelines and Case Studies CAHILL ASSOCIATES Environmental Consultants West Chester, PA (610) 696-4150 www.thcahill.com Goals and Challenges for Manual State Stormwater Policy More Widespread
More information2012 Rainfall, Runoff, Water Level & Temperature Beebe Lake Wright County, MN (# )
www.fixmylake.com 18029 83 rd Avenue North Maple Grove, MN 55311 mail@freshwatersci.com (651) 336-8696 2012 Rainfall, Runoff, Water Level & Temperature Beebe Lake Wright County, MN (#86-0023) Prepared
More informationClay Robinson, PhD, CPSS, PG copyright 2009
Engineering: What's soil got to do with it? Clay Robinson, PhD, CPSS, PG crobinson@wtamu.edu, http://www.wtamu.edu/~crobinson, copyright 2009 Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary soil, noun 1 : firm land
More informationInternational Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Research
EVALUATION OF THE QUANTITY AND QUALITY OF RUNOFF WATER FROM A STRAWBERRY RANCH SLOPING GROUND DURING WINTER STORM EVENTS IN THE CALIFORNIA CENTRAL COAST Gerardo Spinelli 1*, Sacha Lozano 1, Ben Burgoa
More informationMeasuring the Effectiveness of Cure Materials
National Concrete Consortium Embassy Suites, Indianapolis, In Measuring the Effectiveness of Cure Materials Dan G. Zollinger, Ph.D., P.E. Professor, Texas A&M University Zachry Department of Civil Engineering
More informationIN SITU SPECIFIC GRAVITY VS GRAIN SIZE: A BETTER METHOD TO ESTIMATE NEW WORK DREDGING PRODUCTION
IN SITU SPECIFIC GRAVITY VS GRAIN SIZE: A BETTER METHOD TO ESTIMATE NEW WORK DREDGING PRODUCTION Nancy Case O Bourke, PE 1, Gregory L. Hartman, PE 2 and Paul Fuglevand, PE 3 ABSTRACT In-situ specific gravity
More informationSILT FENCE EFFECTIVENESS
SILT FENCE EFFECTIVENESS Michelle G. Holloway, Department of Earth Sciences, University of South Alabama, Mobile, AL 36688. E-mail: MLG@jaguar1.usouthal.edu. Sediment is the number one pollutant in Dog
More informationSelected Site BMPs: Why s the Water Muddy? John C. Hayes, Ph.D., P. E. Biosystems Engineering Clemson University
Selected Site BMPs: Why s the Water Muddy? John C. Hayes, Ph.D., P. E. Biosystems Engineering Clemson University The BMP worked fine until last week when it rained! Turbidity Best Management Practices
More informationCivil Engineering, Surveying and Environmental Consulting WASP0059.ltr.JLS.Mich Ave Bridge Geotech.docx
2365 Haggerty Road South * Canton, Michigan 48188 P: 734-397-3100 * F: 734-397-3131 * www.manniksmithgroup.com August 29, 2012 Mr. Richard Kent Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation Commission 2330 Platt
More informationQUESTION BANK DEPARTMENT: CIVIL SUBJECT CODE / Name: CE 2251 / SOIL MECHANICS SEMESTER: IV UNIT 1- INTRODUCTION PART - A (2 marks) 1. Distinguish between Residual and Transported soil. (AUC May/June 2012)
More informationAgry 465 Exam October 18, 2006 (100 points) (9 pages)
Agry 465 Exam October 18, 2006 (100 points) (9 pages) Name (4) 1. In each of the following pairs of soils, indicate which one would have the greatest volumetric heat capacity, and which would have the
More informationField Exploration. March 31, J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. 115 Northstar Avenue Twin Falls, Idaho Attn: Mr. Tracy Ahrens, P. E. E:
March 31, 201 11 Northstar Avenue 83301 Attn: Mr. Tracy Ahrens, P. E. E: taa@jub.com Re: Geotechnical Data Report Preliminary Phase 1 Field Exploration Revision No. 1 Proposed Rapid Infiltration Basin
More information6. Circle the correct answer: SINK A drains faster or SINK B drains faster Why?
NAME date ROY G BIV Water Cycle and Water Movement in the Ground Test 5. 6. Circle the correct answer: SINK A drains faster or SINK B drains faster Why? 7. Circle the correct answer: SINK A retains more
More information8.1. What is meant by the shear strength of soils? Solution 8.1 Shear strength of a soil is its internal resistance to shearing stresses.
8.1. What is meant by the shear strength of soils? Solution 8.1 Shear strength of a soil is its internal resistance to shearing stresses. 8.2. Some soils show a peak shear strength. Why and what type(s)
More informationThe Use of Expanded Shale, Clay and Slate Lightweight Aggregates in Granular Geotechnical Fills
Information Sheet 6660.0 January 2017 The Use of Expanded Shale, Clay and Slate Lightweight Aggregates in Granular Geotechnical Fills For over 50 years Rotary Kiln produced Expanded Shale, Clay & Slate
More informationNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE COMPLIANCE TEST REPORT
COMPLIANCE TESTING INFORMATION FACILITY DESCRIPTION: TESTING CERTIFICATION: Test Laboratory: United States Test Laboratory, LLC Report Number: 06N074 Laboratory Representative: Richard W. Mouser Witnessed
More informationALS-Resistant Kochia Management in a Corn - Sugarbeet Rotation 2005 to 2006 and 2007 to Robert Wilson
ALS-Resistant Kochia Management in a Corn - Sugarbeet Rotation 5 to and 7 to 8. Robert Wilson A field study was initiated in 5 near Scottsbluff, Nebraska to evaluate the effectiveness of controlling ALS-resistant
More informationSediment Control Practices. John Mathews Ohio Dept. of Natural Resources, Division of Soil and Water Resources
Sediment Control Practices John Mathews Ohio Dept. of Natural Resources, Division of Soil and Water Resources Practices Treat the Largest Soil Particles Sand Sand Silt Clay Treated Untreated Settleable
More informationPERFORMANCE TEST REPORT. Rendered to: VELUX AMERICA, INC. PRODUCT: SUN TUNNEL Domes TYPES: Acrylic and Polycarbonate
PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT Rendered to: VELUX AMERICA, INC. PRODUCT: SUN TUNNEL Domes TYPES: Acrylic and Polycarbonate Report No.: E3490.01-106-31 Report Date: 07/13/15 Test Record Retention Date: 06/18/19
More informationENGINEERING ASSOCIATES
July 16, 211 Vista Design, Inc. 11634 Worcester Highway Showell, Maryland 21862 Attention: Reference: Dear Mr. Polk: Mr. Richard F. Polk, P.E. Geotechnical Engineering Report Charles County RFP No. 11-9
More informationB-1 BORE LOCATION PLAN. EXHIBIT Drawn By: 115G BROOKS VETERINARY CLINIC CITY BASE LANDING AND GOLIAD ROAD SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.
N B-1 SYMBOLS: Exploratory Boring Location Project Mngr: BORE LOCATION PLAN Project No. GK EXHIBIT Drawn By: 115G1063.02 GK Scale: Checked By: 1045 Central Parkway North, Suite 103 San Antonio, Texas 78232
More informationLand and Water Summative Assessment. Name Date
Land and Water Summative Assessment Name Date Read each question carefully and select the best answer. 1. Abby built a model to study how rain changes the land. She shaped the land into single, smooth
More informationUse of Launched Soil Nails to Stabilize Landslides in Summit County, Ohio
Use of Launched Soil Nails to Stabilize Landslides in Summit County, Ohio Mitchell W. Weber, P.G. Gannett Fleming Engineers & Architects, P.C. Greg Bachman, P.E., P.S. County of Summit Engineer Robert
More informationSediment Trap. A temporary runoff containment area, which promotes sedimentation prior to discharge of the runoff through a stabilized spillway.
Sediment Trap SC-15 Source: Caltrans Construction Site Best Management Practices Manual, 2003. Description A temporary runoff containment area, which promotes sedimentation prior to discharge of the runoff
More informationSediment and Erosion Design Guide
Sediment and Erosion Design Guide Sediment Transport & Bulking Factors Goals of this Session Review key principals Review basic relationships and available tools Review bulking factor relationships Purposes
More informationSoil Map Boulder County Area, Colorado (Planet Blue Grass) Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey
475910 476000 476090 476180 476270 476360 105 16' 21'' W 476450 476540 476630 476720 476810 4453350 4453440 4453260 4453350 4453170 4453260 4453080 4453170 4453080 475820 475910 4452990 476000 476090 476180
More informationTESTING PROTOCAL. Via & US Mail. April 30, 2010
Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. 330 Pfingsten Road Northbrook, Illinois 60062 847.272.7400 tel 847.291.5189 fax www.wje.com Via Email & US Mail General Manager 318 West Washington Street Valders
More informationTESTING of AGGREGATES for CONCRETE
TESTING of AGGREGATES for CONCRETE The properties of the aggregates affect both the fresh and hardened properties of concrete. It is crucial to know the properties of the aggregates to be used in the making
More informationA. V T = 1 B. Ms = 1 C. Vs = 1 D. Vv = 1
Geology and Soil Mechanics 55401 /1A (2002-2003) Mark the best answer on the multiple choice answer sheet. 1. Soil mechanics is the application of hydraulics, geology and mechanics to problems relating
More informationFluid Flow Analysis Penn State Chemical Engineering
Fluid Flow Analysis Penn State Chemical Engineering Revised Spring 2015 Table of Contents LEARNING OBJECTIVES... 1 EXPERIMENTAL OBJECTIVES AND OVERVIEW... 1 PRE-LAB STUDY... 2 EXPERIMENTS IN THE LAB...
More informationSTREUVER FIDELCO CAPPELLI, LLC YONKERS DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT PHASE 1. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT For: PALISADES POINT
STREUVER FIDELCO CAPPELLI, LLC YONKERS DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT PHASE 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT For: PALISADES POINT Prepared by: PAULUS, SOKOLOWSKI & SARTOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 1. Methodology
More informationSTORMWATER MANAGEMENT COMPUTATIONS. Mount Prospect
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT COMPUTATIONS Mount Prospect MHG PROJECT No. 2011.173.11 November 6, 2014 Prepared for: Piney Meetinghouse Investments c/o Mr. Dennis Fling 14801 Clopper Road Boyds, MD 20841 (301)
More informationMaterials. Use materials meeting the following.
208.01 Section 208. SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL 208.01 Description. Install and maintain erosion and sedimentation controls to minimize soil erosion and to control sedimentation from affecting
More informationRESEARCH UPDATE ON TURF CULTIVATION. J. A. Murphy and P. E. Rieke Crop and Soil Sciences, M.S.U.
RESEARCH UPDATE ON TURF CULTIVATION J. A. Murphy and P. E. Rieke Crop and Soil Sciences, M.S.U. Soil compaction is a common problem associated with high use recreational turfs. Compacted soil results in
More informationCyclic Triaxial Behavior of an Unsaturated Silty Soil Subjected to Suction Changes
6 th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering 1-4 November 215 Christchurch, New Zealand Cyclic Triaxial Behavior of an Unsaturated Silty Soil Subjected to Suction Changes T. Nishimura
More informationDATA REPORT GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION GALVESTON CRUISE TERMINAL 2 GALVESTON, TEXAS
DATA REPORT GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION GALVESTON CRUISE TERMINAL 2 GALVESTON, TEXAS SUBMITTED TO PORT OF GALVESTON 123 ROSENBERG AVENUE, 8TH FLOOR GALVESTON, TEXAS 77553 BY HVJ ASSOCIATES, INC. HOUSTON,
More informationCE330L Student Lab Manual Mineral Aggregate Properties
Mineral Aggregate Properties Introduction In this lab module several characteristics of aggregates are determined. Tests will be conducted on both coarse and fine aggregates. The results of some of these
More informationNEW DOWN-HOLE PENETROMETER (DHP-CIGMAT) FOR CONSTRUCTION APPLICATIONS
NEW DOWN-HOLE PENETROMETER (DHP-CIGMAT) FOR CONSTRUCTION APPLICATIONS 1 2 C. Vipulanandan 1, Ph.D., M. ASCE and Omer F. Usluogullari 2 Chairman, Professor, Director of Center for Innovative Grouting Materials
More informationMechanical Engineering Division June 1, 2010
Mechanical Engineering Division June 1, 2010 Mr. Jimmy H. Allen Leading Edge Group, Inc. 33 Lynn Batts Lane, Suite #4204 San Antonio, TX 78218 Subject: SwRI Final Report Project 18122.07.003.50cal and
More informationUNIVERSITY OF BOLTON WESTERN INTERNATIONAL COLLEGE, RAS AL KHAIMAH BENG (HONS) CIVIL ENGINEERING SEMESTER TWO EXAMINATION 2014/2015
OCD54 UNIVERSITY OF BOLTON WESTERN INTERNATIONAL COLLEGE, RAS AL KHAIMAH BENG (HONS) CIVIL ENGINEERING SEMESTER TWO EXAMINATION 2014/2015 GROUND AND WATER STUDIES 2 MODULE NO: CIE5005 Date: Thursday 10
More informationATTACHMENT A PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL SUMMARY
ATTACHMENT A PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL SUMMARY Kevin M. Martin, P.E. KMM Geotechnical Consultants, LLC 7 Marshall Road Hampstead, NH 0384 603-489-6 (p)/ 603-489-8 (f)/78-78-4084(m) kevinmartinpe@aol.com
More information@Copyright 2016 SKAPS Industries.
SKAPS INDUSTRIES 571 Industrial Pkwy, Commerce, GA 30529 Phone: (706) 336 7000 Fax: (706) 336 7007 E Mail: contact@skaps.com SKAPS GEOCOMPOSITE DROP IN SPECIFICATIONS @Copyright 2016 SKAPS Industries www.skaps.com
More informationDashed line indicates the approximate upper limit boundary for natural soils. C L o r O L C H o r O H
SYMBOL SOURCE 8 9 1 SOIL DATA NATURAL SAMPLE DEPTH WATER PLASTIC LIQUID PLASTICITY NO. CONTENT LIMIT LIMIT INDEX (%) (%) (%) (%) Client: County of Berthoud Project: Project No.: Boring B-2 S-1-5' 6.2 8
More informationGeology and Soil Mechanics /1A ( ) Mark the best answer on the multiple choice answer sheet.
Geology and Soil Mechanics 55401 /1A (2003-2004) Mark the best answer on the multiple choice answer sheet. 1. Soil mechanics is the application of hydraulics, geology and mechanics to problems relating
More informationCity of Thornton Attn: Tim Semones Development Engineeering 9500 Civic Center Dr. Thornton, CO 80229
Development Engineering Land Surveying Construction Administration District Services October 20, 2017 City of Thornton Attn: Tim Semones Development Engineeering 9500 Civic Center Dr. Thornton, CO 80229
More informationThe Climate of Bryan County
The Climate of Bryan County Bryan County is part of the Crosstimbers throughout most of the county. The extreme eastern portions of Bryan County are part of the Cypress Swamp and Forest. Average annual
More information1.0 INSPECTION ANNUAL INSPECTION, JUNE 29, 2011 CARMACKS COPPER PROJECT, CARMACKS, YUKON. Dear Mr. West-Sells,
Doc. No. 162 Rev. 0 Mr. Paul West-Sells President & Chief Operating Officer Western Copper Corporation 2060-1111 West Georgia Street Vancouver, BC V6E 4M3 ANNUAL INSPECTION, JUNE 29, 2011 CARMACKS COPPER
More information4. Soil Consistency (Plasticity) (Das, chapter 4)
4. Soil Consistency (Plasticity) (Das, chapter 4) 1 What is Consistency? Consistency is a term used to describe the degree of firmness of fine-grained soils (silt and clay). The consistency of fine grained
More informationBasic Math Concepts for Water and Wastewater Operators. Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Basic Math Concepts for Water and Wastewater Operators Topics Hierarchy of operations Manipulating equations Unit/dimensional analysis and conversion factors Electricity Temperature Geometry Flow hydraulics
More informationEvaluating Structural Performance of Base/Subbase Materials at the Louisiana Accelerated Pavement Research Facility
Evaluating Structural Performance of Base/Subbase Materials at the Louisiana Accelerated Pavement Research Facility Zhong Wu, Ph.D., P.E. Zhongjie Zhang, Bill King Louay Mohammad Outline Background Objectives
More informationGeology Chapter Teacher Sheet. Activity #3: Determining the Percolation Rate of Soil
Geology Chapter Teacher Sheet Activity #3: Determining the Percolation Rate of Soil Adapted from The Percolation Rate of a Soil, CurriculumResources for Earth Science Teachers, Maine Department of Conservation.
More informationHISTORY OF CONSTRUCTION FOR EXISTING CCR SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT PLANT GASTON ASH POND 40 CFR (c)(1)(i) (xii)
HISTORY OF CONSTRUCTION FOR EXISTING CCR SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT PLANT GASTON ASH POND 40 CFR 257.73(c)(1)(i) (xii) (i) Site Name and Ownership Information: Site Name: E.C. Gaston Steam Plant Site Location:
More informationObjectives: After completing this assignment, you should be able to:
Data Analysis Assignment #1 Evaluating the effects of watershed land use on storm runoff Assignment due: 21 February 2013, 5 pm Objectives: After completing this assignment, you should be able to: 1) Calculate
More informationAttachment B. Grain Size Distribution Curves
Attachment B Grain Size Distribution Curves AREVA Resources Canada Inc. Kiggavik Project EIS December 11 Attachment B Technical Appendix 6A Surficial Geology and Terrain Client: Areva Project:
More informationCorrelation of unified and AASHTO soil classification systems for soils classification
Journal of Earth Sciences and Geotechnical Engineering, vol. 8, no. 1, 2018, 39-50 ISSN: 1792-9040 (print version), 1792-9660 (online) Scienpress Ltd, 2018 Correlation of unified and AASHTO classification
More informationReflectec Thermal Fabric & Reflectec Fiberboard
MODIFIED ASTM E 1354 CONE CALORIMETER THERMAL RESPONSE TEST (Final Report) TEST REPORT Reflectec Thermal Fabric & Reflectec Fiberboard Project No. 16723-113972 April 22, 2003 Prepared for: John W. Mallette
More informationSubsurface Erosion in Response to Land Management Changes and Soil Hydropedology. G.V. Wilson, J. R. Rigby, S.M. Dabney
Subsurface Erosion in Response to Land Management Changes and Soil Hydropedology G.V. Wilson, J. R. Rigby, S.M. Dabney USDA-ARS National Sedimentation Laboratory Soil Pipeflow & Internal Erosion Impacts
More informationFORM A GEOGRAPHY 1114 LABORATORY FINAL EXAM Teaching Assistant SAMPLE Lab Meeting. Place all answers on the answer sheet; 2 points per question
FORM A GEOGRAPHY 1114 NAME LABORATORY FINAL EXAM Teaching Assistant SAMPLE Lab Meeting Place all answers on the answer sheet; 2 points per question FORMULAS PPT = (PET-D) + S ± = Δ SOIL G = V H Q = V A
More informationJournal of Asian Scientific Research
Journal of Asian Scientific Research 2(11):587-592 Journal of Asian Scientific Research journal homepage: http://aessweb.com/journal-detail.php?id=53 EFFECT OF NANOMATERIAL TREATMENT ON GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES
More informationACT Science Homework Science 2, Set 1 35 Minutes 38 Questions
ACT Science Homework Science 2, Set 1 35 Minutes 38 Questions Passage I DIRECTIONS: There are seven passages in this test. Each passage is followed by several questions. After reading a passage, choose
More informationTikrit University College of Engineering Civil engineering Department
Tikrit University SOIL CLASSIFICATION College of Engineering Civil engineering Department Soil Mechanics 3 rd Class Lecture notes Up Copyrights 2016 Classification of soil is the separation of soil into
More informationSoil Toil. Student McStudent Mrs. Teacher November 26, 2017 Grade 6
Soil Toil Student McStudent Mrs. Teacher November 26, 2017 Grade 6 Table of Contents Abstract Page 1 Question Page 2 Variables Page 2 Hypothesis Page 2 Background Research Pages 4-5 Materials Page 5 Experimental
More informationExperimental Investigation of Soil-Pipe Friction Coefficients for Thermoplastic Pipes Installed in Selected Geological Materials
North American Society for Trenchless Technology (NASTT) NASTT s 2014 No-Dig Show Orlando, Florida April 13-17, 2014 MM-T6-03 Experimental Investigation of Soil-Pipe Friction Coefficients for Thermoplastic
More informationCONQUEST ENGINEERING LTD.
CONQUEST ENGINEERING LTD. Geotechnical and Materials Engineers Concrete Technology, Blasting Consultants Construction Quality Assurance / Quality Control 8 Bluewater Road, Bedford, NS BB J6 Phone (9)85-7
More informationThe Climate of Murray County
The Climate of Murray County Murray County is part of the Crosstimbers. This region is a transition between prairies and the mountains of southeastern Oklahoma. Average annual precipitation ranges from
More informationUNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH OF SOFT CLAY REINFORCE WITH SINGLE 16MM DIAMETER ENCAPSULATED BOTTOM ASH COLUMN NABILAH BINTI MD MASHOD FAKEH
1 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH OF SOFT CLAY REINFORCE WITH SINGLE 16MM DIAMETER ENCAPSULATED BOTTOM ASH COLUMN NABILAH BINTI MD MASHOD FAKEH B. ENG (HONS.) CIVIL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA PAHANG 1 UNIVERSITI
More informationLincoln County Board of Commissioner s Agenda Item Cover Sheet
Lincoln County Board of Commissioner s Agenda Item Cover Sheet Board Meeting Date: Agenda Item Type: Consent Agenda: Public Hearing: Regular Agenda: Presentation Time (est): Submitting Person: Phone Number/Ext:
More informationSoil and Water Conservation Engineering Prof. Rajendra Singh Department of Agricultural and Food Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Soil and Water Conservation Engineering Prof. Rajendra Singh Department of Agricultural and Food Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Lecture 04 Soil Erosion - Mechanics Hello friends
More informationThe Climate of Texas County
The Climate of Texas County Texas County is part of the Western High Plains in the north and west and the Southwestern Tablelands in the east. The Western High Plains are characterized by abundant cropland
More informationModule 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
More informationMARTIN COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MARTIN COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 4 S.E. MONTEREY ROAD STUART, FL 34996 DOUG SMITH Commissioner, District ED FIELDING Commissioner, District ANNE SCOTT Commissioner, District 3 SARAH HEARD Commissioner,
More informationQuantifying Effective Rain in Landscape Irrigation Water Management
Quantifying Effective Rain in Landscape Irrigation Water Management 20 October 2009 Steven E. Moore Irrisoft, Inc. PO Box 6266 North Logan, Utah 84321 smoore@irrisoft.net Abstract Climatologically based
More informationBreak Time. Cornell Short Course
Break Time Poor Plant Health Root Depth & Soil Type Active Root Zone The depth of soil containing the majority of feeder roots } Soil type Basic infiltration rate (mm/hour) } Sand > 30 (1.2-4 in./hr.)
More informationGoundwater Seepage Mechanisms of Streambank Erosion and Failure
Goundwater Seepage Mechanisms of Streambank Erosion and Failure Taber L. Midgley M.S. Student Garey A. Fox Associate Professor Abdulsahib Al-Madhhachi Ph.D. Student Rachel Carson M.S. Student Biosystems
More information