Abstract
Purpose
Sediments are the leading cause of water quality deterioration around the world. A number of sediment retention devices, including ditch checks, have been developed in the last few decades to improve water quality. Differences between methodologies used to evaluate product performance in the past have led to difficulties in comparing evaluations from various studies.
Materials and methods
A new testing protocol for evaluating ditch check products was developed at the Erosion Control Research and Training Center (ECRTC) of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign to provide a reliable and easily replicable testing procedure to evaluate product performance under standardized testing conditions. As per the field-scale protocol, three different flow conditions (5, 7.5, and 10 l s−1) were used to evaluate performance both in terms of water quality (turbidity and sediment concentration) and channel disturbance prior to permanent stabilization, while simulating the conditions typically found during construction activities. The flow conditions can be reproduced in the field setting using commercially available pumps and were selected based on the peak flow-generated construction site of varying size in central Illinois, and the 5, 7.5, and 10 l s−1 flows corresponded to peak flow generated from 5, 7.5, and 10 acre construction area from 10-year rainfall event. The three products tested were GeoRidge, Sediment Log, and Triangular Silt Dike.
Results and discussion
In terms of sediment concentration, Triangular Silt Dike performed better under all flow conditions, while GeoRidge and Sediment Log performed similarly. GeoRidge was able to retain more sediment upstream compared to Triangular Silt Dike and Sediment Log.
Conclusions
This study provides a reliable and easily replicable testing procedure to evaluate ditch check product performance under standardized testing conditions. This study can also help in future product development and proper product selection for erosion and sediment control plans based on the product performance.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aiken GR, McKnight DM, Wershaw RL, MacCarthy P (1985) Humic substances in soil, sediment, and water: geochemistry, isolation and characterization. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 692 pp
ASTM (1985) Standard Test Method for Particle-Size Analysis of Soils: D-422-63. American Society of Testing and Materials. West Conshohocken, PA, USA
ASTM (2007a) Standard Test Method for Determination of Rolled Erosion Control Product (RECP) Performance in Protecting Hillslopes from Rainfall-Induced Erosion: D-6459-07. American Society of Testing and Materials. West Conshohocken, PA, USA
ASTM (2007b) Standard Test Methods for Determining Sediment Concentration in Water Samples: D-3977-97. American Society of Testing and Materials. West Conshohocken, PA, USA
ASTM (2010) Standard Test Method for Determination of Temporary Ditch Check Performance in Protecting Earthen Channels from Stormwater-Induced Erosion: D-7208-06. American Society of Testing and Materials. West Conshohocken, PA, USA
Clifford NJ, Richards KS, Brown RA, Lane SN (1995) Laboratory and field assessment of an infrared turbidity probe and its response to particle size and variation in suspended sediment concentration. Hydrol Sci J 40:771–791
Day PR (1965) Particle fractionation and particle-size analysis. In: Black CA et al (eds) Methods of soil analysis, Part 1. Agronomy Monograph 9, American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 545–567
EPA (1995) Controlling nonpoint source runoff pollution from roads, highways and bridges. 841-F-95-008a, Fact Sheet. Environmental Protection Agency
EPA (2000) Stormwater phase II final rule: construction site runoff control minimum control measure. 833-F-00-008, Fact Sheet. Environmental Protection Agency
Gee GW, Bauder JW (1986) Particle-size Analysis. In: Page AL (ed) Methods of soil analysis, part 1, physical and mineralogical methods, Second Editionth edn. Agronomy Monograph 9, American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 383–411
Gippel CJ (1995) Potential of turbidity monitoring for measuring the transport of suspended solids in streams. Hydrol Process 9:83–97
Hollander M, Wolfe DA (1973) Nonparametric statistical methods. John Wiley & Sons, New York
Landphair HC, McFalls JA, Li M (1997) Alternatives to silt fence for temporary sediment control at highway construction sites. Texas Department of Transportation Report 1737-S
McFalls J, Li M, Desai ABR (2010) Roadside Sediment Control Device Evaluation Program: Technical Report. Texas Transportation Institute Report 0-5948-1, Austin
Morgan RPC (1995) Soil erosion and conservation. Longman, Essex, UK
Packman JJ, Comings KJ, Booth DB (1999) Using turbidity to determine total suspended solids in urbanizing streams in the Puget Lowlands: in Confronting Uncertainty: Managing Change in Water Resources and the Environment. Canadian Water Resources Association annual meeting, 27–29 October 1999, Vancouver, pp 158–165
Patil SS, Barfield BJ, Wilber GG (2011) Turbidity modeling based on the concentration of total suspended solids for stormwater runoff from construction and development sites. In: Beighley RE, Kilgore MW (eds) World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2011: Bearing Knowledge for Sustainability. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, pp 477–486
Theisen MS, Spittle K (2006) A quantitative comparison of sediment retention devices under standardized test conditions. Profile Products, LLC. Ankeny, Iowa. Available at: http://files.tlhort.com/topicassets/attachments/ta_413_paper_-_comparison_of_sediment_retention_devices_-_2006.pdf. Accessed on May 12, 2014
Welch BL (1947) The generalization of ‘Student’s’ problem when several different population variances are involved. Biometrika 34:28–35
Wolfe KB, Peters JL (2009) Qualitative Valuation of Performance Testing for Sediment Retention Devices (SRDS). 40th International Erosion Control Association Annual Conference and Expo 2009, Reno, pp 151–163
Acknowledgments
This publication is based on the results of research project: ICT-R27-102, Installation & Performance Testing of Ditch Checks & Inlet Protection Structures. The project was conducted in cooperation with the Illinois Center for Transportation; the Illinois Department of Transportation, Division of Highways; and the US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. The contents of this publication reflect the view of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Illinois Center for Transportation, the Illinois Department of Transportation, or the Federal Highway Administration. This publication does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Responsible editor: Rajith Mukundan
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
ESM 1
The Electronic Supplementary Material (Ditch Check Products) belonging to this manuscript is available online. (DOCX 1857 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
García, C.B., Monical, J., Bhattarai, R. et al. Field evaluation of sediment retention devices under concentrated flow conditions. J Soils Sediments 15, 2022–2031 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-015-1167-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-015-1167-6