Field Evaluation of Wattle and Silt Fence Ditch Checks

Schussler, Jaime C.; Kazaz, Billur; Perez, Michael A.; Whitman, J. Blake; Çetin, Bora

doi:10.1177/0361198121992073

Cited by 11 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Perez et al report perspectives from ALDOT, including “ALDOT has decided that it must go beyond mere regulatory compliance to realize its (environmental) vision” ( 45 ). Additional takeaways state that research and training from AU-SRF have led to “effective and economical means of protecting Alabama waters.” Although ALDOT first adopted SF DCs with dewatering weirs and wattles with alternative staking patterns and underlays, Schussler et al field evaluated similar installations during the expansion of Highway U.S. 30 in Tama County, Iowa, for 5 months ( 38 ). Sediment retention from these enhanced DCs was significantly more than the standard SF and wattle DC installations, which were parallel-monitored.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Erosion and Sediment Control Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Considering the DC research at AU-SRF, Schussler et al conducted a field evaluation of wattle and SF DC installations on an Iowa DOT project ( 38 ). Wattle installations included the standard excelsior wattles staked through the netting and fill material every 2.0 ft (0.6 m) on-center ( 38 ). The modified installation incorporated natural fiber underlay pinned to the channel and teepee staking pattern to secure the wattle and minimize buoyancy.…”

Section: Erosion and Sediment Control Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The standard SF DC included a geotextile supported by steel T-posts and installed perpendicular to flow. A modified SF DC increased sediment retention by 304% and incorporated design improvements found at AU-SRF, including V-shape with weir and wire reinforcement ( 38 ).…”

Section: Erosion and Sediment Control Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Decade of Research in Review at the Auburn University Stormwater Research Facility

Schussler

Perez

Donald

et al. 2022

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sediment remains one of the most commonly occurring pollutants affecting the U.S.’s water bodies, as identified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) ( 1). Construction activities largely accelerate soil erosion and subsequent sediment deposition. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Construction General Permit requires construction operators to implement erosion and sediment control (E&SC) plans to minimize downstream implications from sediment-laden discharge. However, E&SC practices are often designed from “rules of thumb” and lack scientific, performance-based evidence in their design and implementation. The Auburn University Stormwater Research Facility (AU-SRF), previously the Auburn University Erosion and Sediment Control Testing Facility (AU-ESCTF), is an outdoor research center dedicated to evaluating E&SC practices and products commonly used on highway construction projects. Large-scale test apparatuses and methods at AU-SRF are designed to mimic construction site conditions, including rainfall, flow rates, topography, and soil characteristics, to evaluate existing and novel E&SC practices. Since its inception in 2008, AU-SRF has provided small-, medium-, and large-scale testing evaluations for numerous Departments of Transportation and product manufacturers. Findings from controlled testing have continued to inform the selection, design, implementation, and maintenance of E&SC practices used on construction sites and protect downstream waters and infrastructure. In the first decade, AU-SRF has directed 13 research projects and produced more than 30 peer-reviewed publications and 100 professional presentations. As AU-SRF grows into its second decade and efforts reach outside of the southeastern region, the mission to advance knowledge through E&SC research and development, product evaluation, and training remains constant. This review synthesizes the research produced from large-scale testing at AU-SRF to date and presents ongoing projects.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Erosion and Sediment Control Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Erosion and Sediment Control Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Erosion and Sediment Control Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Decade of Research in Review at the Auburn University Stormwater Research Facility

Schussler

Perez

Donald

et al. 2022

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Conversely, sediment control practices capture dislodged sediment and reduce off-site transport of soil. Sediment control practices include sediment barriers, inlet protection, and sedimentation basins, amongst others (4)(5)(6). The success of an E&SC plan, and in turn a site's SWPPP, is dependent on the appropriate design, installation, and maintenance practices used on site.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil Loss Risk Analysis for Construction Activities

Kazaz

Schussler

Dickey

et al. 2022

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Construction-related ground-disturbing activities leave exposed land susceptible to soil loss and increase the risk of polluting adjacent waterbodies with sediment-laden discharge. State and federal regulations require stormwater pollution prevention plans to be implemented during construction to mitigate the impact of stormwater runoff. Areas prone to soil loss can be identified early in site planning using soil loss modeling. Identification of these critical areas could influence the design and placement of erosion and sediment control practices. The Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) can be applied to estimate the soil loss on construction sites in tonnes per Ha per year (tons/acre/year) by considering factors of rainfall erosivity, soil erodibility, length of slope, erosion control, and sediment control. This study integrates geographic information system (GIS) with RUSLE to create soil loss models for residential, commercial, and highway construction scenarios in the contiguous U.S.A. These three construction types were modeled in various locations throughout the country to assess erosive risk. Soil loss outputs were categorized into five risk tiers ranging from very low to very high. Southeastern states had the highest estimated soil loss during residential, commercial, and highway construction, reaching rates of 1,464, 706, and 1,302 tonnes per Ha per year (653, 315, and 581 tons/acre/year), respectively. This study provides a customizable model for any site-specific slope-length factor outside of the three construction scenarios modeled. Integration of GIS provides a unique opportunity to apply RUSLE across a larger landscape. The presented macro-scale data can be used for the design of erosion and sediment control practices.

show abstract

Using additional roughness to characterize erosion control treatment effectiveness in roadside ditch lines

Alvis,

Luce,

Istanbulluoglu

et al. 2024

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forest roadside ditch lines capture and redirect road runoff and typically have erosion control treatments installed therein. Existing methods used to determine the effectiveness of roadside ditch line erosion control treatments estimate fixed fractional reductions in sediment yield. However, fixed fractional reductions do not describe dependence on any measurable physical property of treatment, climate, and the environment. Here, we use additional flow roughness induced by erosion control treatments as a metric that can be used as the basis of estimating treatment effectiveness in varying contexts. We investigate its utility in small‐scale field experiments in western Washington. We measured the physical characteristics of each ditch (e.g., shape, soil texture, and slope) and flow velocities and sediment concentrations for each treatment under multiple experimental discharges. We then used the concept of shear stress partitioning to relate sediment yield from the ditch line erosion treatments to grain shear stress, which is a function of flow roughness (Manning's n) of the respective treatment. We found that (1) a given erosion control treatment produced consistent Manning's n values across multiple replications and sites, with a bare ditch (no treatment) yielding the lowest roughness (n = 0.05) and a densely wattled ditch yielding the highest roughness (n = 0.75); (2) sediment load and calculated grain shear stress data yielded a single positive relationship when data from each experiment were combined, which suggests the effect of additional roughness on grain shear stress is a main driver in the reduction of ditch line sediment load; and (3) in our dataset, fractional erosion reduction had a variable and nonlinear sensitivity to low flow rates (99% of observed flows) for lower roughnesses. Our results demonstrate how additional flow roughness can be used as a general metric to help evaluate the effectiveness of ditch line erosion control treatments for a variety of physical conditions.

show abstract

Field Evaluation of Wattle and Silt Fence Ditch Checks

Cited by 11 publications

References 13 publications

Decade of Research in Review at the Auburn University Stormwater Research Facility

Decade of Research in Review at the Auburn University Stormwater Research Facility

Soil Loss Risk Analysis for Construction Activities

Using additional roughness to characterize erosion control treatment effectiveness in roadside ditch lines

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About