January-February 2009

Channel Protection Measures

Hard- and soft-armor options

Article Tools

Create a Link to this Article

Photo: Bethlehem Precast

By Steve Goldberg

1 Comments


As an aside, a number of engineers appear to agree with Faust’s assessment. The Alabama Handbook for Erosion Control, Sediment Control and Stormwater Management comments, “Studies have shown that most natural stream channels are formed with a bank-full capacity to pass runoff from a storm with a 1.5 to 2-year recurrence interval. As upstream development occurs, the volume and velocity of flow from these relatively frequent storms increase. Even smaller storms with less than 1-year recurrence intervals begin to cause streams to flow full or flood. Stream channels are often subject to a 3- to 5-fold increase in the frequency of bank-full flows in a typical urbanizing watershed. This increase in the flooding frequency places a stress on the channel to adjust its shape and alignment to accommodate the increased flow.

“Unfortunately, this adjustment takes place in a very short time period (in geologic terms) and, the transition is usually not a smooth one. Meandering stream channels which were once parabolic in shape and covered with vegetation typically become straight, wide rectangular channels with barren vertical banks. This process of channel erosion often causes significant property damage, and the resulting sediment which is generated is transported downstream, further contributing to channel degradation.”

Advertisement

This was the process occurring with the Frost Hollow swale. “There is a huge development upstream,” notes Faust. “There is water feeding in from area roads; there is the stormwater runoff. There are some runoff basins for water retention, but these are not sufficient for major storms.”

To solve the problem, the Frost Hollow channel was widened. Initially, soft protection was used, in which a screening mesh was applied and overseeded with grass. However, these measures were put in too late and the grass couldn’t get established before the next heavy storm event. It washed out, and then the decision was made to replace the screening mesh with CC 45 Cable Concrete articulated concrete block mattress manufactured by International Erosion Control Systems. Design engineer Ryan Christman of Keystone Consulting Engineers was free to select what he thought was best for the project—there were no specific municipal requirements. But Faust notes that the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection has approved Cable Concrete as an acceptable best management practice for stormwater management and adds that the CC 45 is highly effective in dealing with the high water velocity and the regular strong storm events in the area. Next Page >

What Do You Think?

Post a Comment

Cdon

December 16th, 2008 3:43 PM PT

I have a problem with the context of the below statement. He explains that curative options were somewhat limited. "There was no soft armor available-and still isn't-that can withstand the shear forces and velocities present in the channel. I would estimate that any hard-armor solution is going to cost approximately 2.5 to 4 times what a soft-armor solution would, the caveat being that most times ArmorFlex is being considered as a design solution, there simply is no soft-armor solution." www.scourstop.com will show you the soft armor which has been proven to handle the flows mentioned. Used on multiple projects with Army Corps involement on waterways such as the Mississippi. Proven via colorado state to velocites up to 21.5 f/s. While protecting properly, enabling all of the positives mentioned in the first part of the article. I would like to see a follow up article involving the actuall capabilities of the soft armor protection authored. Corydon Coppola

Post a Comment

Not a subscriber? Sign Up
 
 
*  
 




 

Get Erosion Control E-mail Updates!

Get weekly news and updates through our Erosion Control e-mail newsletter!