Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCHRP REPORT 822 Evaluation and Assessment of Environmentally Sensitive Stream Bank Protection Measures P. F. Lagasse P. E. Clopper Ayres AssociAtes inc Fort Collins, Colorado C. I. Thornton colorAdo stAte University Fort Collins, Colorado F. D. Shields, Jr. shields engineering llc Oxford, Mississippi J. McCullah sAlix Applied eArthcAre Redding, California W. J. Spitz Ayres AssociAtes inc Fort Collins, Colorado Subscriber Categories Environment â¢ Hydraulics and Hydrology TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2016 www.TRB.org Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research is the most effective way to solve many problems facing highway administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation results in increasingly complex problems of wide inter- est to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. Recognizing this need, the leadership of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in 1962 ini- tiated an objective national highway research program using modern scientific techniquesâthe National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). NCHRP is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of AASHTO and receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine was requested by AASHTO to administer the research program because of TRBâs recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. TRB is uniquely suited for this purpose for many reasons: TRB maintains an extensive com- mittee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; TRB possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state, and local governmental agencies, univer- sities, and industry; TRBâs relationship to the Academies is an insurance of objectivity; and TRB maintains a full-time staff of specialists in high- way transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified by chief administrators and other staff of the highway and transporta- tion departments and by committees of AASHTO. Topics of the highest merit are selected by the AASHTO Standing Committee on Research (SCOR), and each year SCORâs recommendations are proposed to the AASHTO Board of Directors and the Academies. Research projects to address these topics are defined by NCHRP, and qualified research agencies are selected from submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the Acad- emies and TRB. The needs for highway research are many, and NCHRP can make significant contributions to solving highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement, rather than to substitute for or duplicate, other highway research programs. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet by going to http://www.national-academies.org and then searching for TRB Printed in the United States of America NCHRP REPORT 822 Project 24-39 ISSN 0077-5614 ISBN 978-0-309-37540-5 Library of Congress Control Number 2016938262 Â© 2016 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FRA, FTA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, PHMSA, or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to increase the benefits that transportation contributes to society by providing leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs varied committees, task forces, and panels annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.
C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and was conducted in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), which is administered by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academies. The research reported herein was performed under NCHRP Project 24-39 by Ayres Associates, Fort Collins, Colorado. Dr. Peter F. Lagasse, Senior Water Resources Engineer, served as Principal Investigator. Mr. Paul E. Clopper of Ayres Associates and Dr. Christopher I. Thornton of Colorado State University served as Co-PIs. They were assisted by Dr. F. Douglas Shields, Jr. of Shields Engineering LLC, Mr. John McCullah of Salix Applied Earthcare, and Mr. William J. Spitz of Ayres Associates. The laboratory test- ing performed under this project was conducted at the Colorado State University Engineering Research Center. The authors wish to acknowledge the efforts of the CSU graduate students in hydraulic engineer- ing who worked under the direct supervision of Mr. Allen J. Chestnut, an MS candidate from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, who reported on the testing results in partial fulfillment of the requirements of his degree program. A special acknowledgement is due Mr. William M. deRosset of Ayres Associates who supervised the implementation of the laboratory testing phase of this study for the research team and developed the HEC-RAS models which supported the detailed hydraulic analyses of the testing program results. We also wish to thank Ms. Sue Paquette, City of Fort Collins, who provided access to and assisted in the harvesting of the willows for the testing program. CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 822 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Christopher Hedges, Manager, National Cooperative Highway Research Program David A. Reynaud, Senior Program Officer Megan A. Chamberlain, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Scott E. Hitchcock, Editor NCHRP PROJECT 24-39 PANEL Field of Soils and GeologyâArea of Mechanics and Foundations Michael T. Long, Eugene, OR (Chair) Jon K. Zirkle, Tennessee DOT, Nashville, TN Michael Fazio, City of Bluffdale, Bluffdale, UT Wayne Gannett, New York State DOT, Albany, NY Kristin A. Schuster, Michigan DOT, Lansing, MI Neil VanBebber, Illinois DOT, Springfield, IL Richard Y. Woo, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore, MD Larry A. Arneson, FHWA Liaison Christine Gerencher, TRB Liaison
In conducting field site visits in the Southeast Dr. Shields was ably supported by Drs. David Derrick and Andrew Simon, who were involved with the original design and/or installation and monitoring of most of the sites, and Mr. Brad Maurer of the Nature Conservancy who supported the visits to the Buttahatchee River sites. Similarly, we wish to thank Dr. Don Gray of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engi- neering of the University of Michigan for suggesting the Ann Arbor, MI, sites in the upper Midwest and supporting Dr. Shields with expert advice and detailed knowledge of the sites. Mr. Bob Grese, Arboretum Director, accompanied the visits to the Huron River sites of the Nichols Arboretum. Special thanks are due to all of these âvolunteersâ who contributed to the success of the site visit program. The authors also acknowledge the contributions of Mr. Thomas W. Smith, Geotechnical Engineer, RiverSmith Engineering Inc. who accompanied Mr. McCullah on the California site visits and reviewed the geotechnical sections of this report, Dr. David Zachmann, Vista Computational Technology LLC who formulated the Compendium in a searchable database format, and Dr. William Miller, Miller Ecologi- cal Consultants, Inc. who reviewed the aquatic habitat sections of this report. We also acknowledge the contribution of Dr. Peggy Johnson, Professor and Head, Department of Civil and Environmental Engi- neering, Pennsylvania State University, whose suggestions during the early stages of this study helped set the direction for this research. Finally, the participation, advice, and support of NCHRP panel members throughout this project are gratefully acknowledged.
NCHRP Report 822: Evaluation and Assessment of Environmentally Sensitive Stream Bank Protection Measures evaluates and assesses existing guidelines for the design, installation, monitoring, and maintenance of environmentally sensitive stream bank stabilization and protection measures, and develops quantitative engineering design guidance for selected treatments. Updated design guidelines for three widely used treatments are presented: live siltation and live staking with a rock toe, vegetated mechanically stabilized earth, and veg- etated rip rap. This report would be of interest to hydraulic and environmental engineers There was a reluctance on the part of many engineers to utilize biotechnical approaches to stream bank stabilization techniques. This was due, in part, to a lack of technical training, experience, and definitive hydraulic engineering design guidance. In particular, there was a lack of knowledge about the properties of the vegetative materials being used in relation to the force and stress generated by flowing water. There was also concern regarding the difficulties in obtaining consistent performance from countermeasures that rely on living materials. In addition to the laboratory testing, Ayres Associates conducted a synthesis and survey of current practice and found that the available hydraulic design criteria are drawn from a variety of sources and vary in quality from qualitative anecdotal rules of thumb to isolated spot measurements of velocity. For the engineer involved in the multidisciplinary design of an environmentally sensitive treatment, this report also includes current guidance from the Federal Highway Adminis- tration on the use of biotechnical treatments in proximity to transportation infrastructure. In addition, for the Professional Engineer (PE) on a design team, the report explores aspects of professional liability in environmentally sensitive design. As a result of this research, updated quantitative guidance and more detailed documen- tation and guidelines for the design, installation, monitoring, and maintenance of envi- ronmentally sensitive stream bank protective measures are now available. This research produced practical, implementable guidance that will enhance the ability of practitioners to utilize environmentally sensitive treatments as an alternative to, or in conjunction with, more traditional âhard engineeringâ approaches. F O R E W O R D By David A. Reynaud Staff Officer Transportation Research Board
1 Summary 5 Chapter 1 Introduction and Research Approach 5 1.1 Scope and Research Objectives 5 1.1.1 Background 6 1.1.2 Objectives 7 1.2 Research Approach 8 1.3 Research TasksâPhase I 8 1.3.1 Task 1âReview the Technical Literature 9 1.3.2 Task 2âSurvey of Relevant Agencies 9 1.3.3 Task 3âIdentify Field Evaluation Sites 9 1.3.4 Task 4âDevelop Laboratory Test Plan 11 1.3.5 Task 5âInterim Report 11 1.3.6 Task 6âField Investigations 11 1.3.7 Task 7âLaboratory Studies 12 1.3.8 Task 8âDevelop Compendium of Photographs and Case Histories 12 1.3.9 Task 9âDevelop Detailed Design Guidelines 12 1.3.10 Task 10âSubmit Final Report 12 1.4 Points Addressed by the Research Plan 14 Chapter 2 Findings 14 2.1 NCHRP Report 544 14 2.2 Synthesis of Current Practice 14 2.2.1 Introduction 14 2.2.2 Environmentally Sensitive Channel- and Bank-Protection Measures 15 2.2.3 Literature Prior to NCHRP Project 24-19 17 2.2.4 Applied Literature Subsequent to NCHRP Project 24-19 26 2.2.5 Advances in Fundamental Science Subsequent to NCHRP 24-19 29 2.3 Survey of Current Practice 29 2.3.1 Survey Form and Distribution 30 2.3.2 Summary of Survey Results 32 2.4 Field Site Evaluations 32 2.4.1 Site Selection Criteria 34 2.4.2 Screening, Schedule, and Initial ObservationsâField Site Visits 42 2.5 Compendium of Field Data, Documentation, and Photographs 42 2.5.1 Introduction 43 2.5.2 Selected Findings on Environmentally Sensitive Treatments 54 2.5.3 User Guide for the Compendium 55 2.6 Summary of Findings and Observations from Current Practice 55 2.6.1 Literature Review 56 2.6.2 Observations from Current Practice C O N T E N T S
57 Chapter 3 Testing and Appraisal of Testing Results 57 3.1 Overview and Selection of Treatments for Testing 57 3.1.1 Overview 57 3.1.2 Proposed Treatments for Laboratory Testing 59 3.1.3 Selection of the Task 7 Testing Treatments 63 3.2 Laboratory Testing Plan 63 3.2.1 Installation 66 3.2.2 Testing Protocols and Data Collection 67 3.3 Tray 1 TestingâLive Siltation and Live Staking with Riprap Toe 67 3.4 Tray 2 TestingâVMSE Without Hard Toe 70 3.5 Testing and Data Summary 70 3.5.1 Calibration of Manning n Values 72 3.5.2 Point Velocity Measurements and Velocity Distributions 77 3.5.3 Bed Shear Stress 77 3.5.4 Erosion 83 3.6 Appraisal of Testing Results 83 3.6.1 Erosion vs. Shear Stress 86 3.6.2 Pronation of Willows 86 3.6.3 Summary of Laboratory Testing Program 90 Chapter 4 Design Guidelines and Appraisal of Research Results 90 4.1 Overview 91 4.2 General Considerations 91 4.2.1 Introduction 91 4.2.2 Hydrologic, Hydraulic, and Geomorphic Considerations 94 4.2.3 Site-Specific Physical Processes Affecting Environmentally Sensitive Treatments 111 4.2.4 Geotechnical Considerations 119 4.2.5 Monitoring Success of the Vegetative Component 124 4.2.6 Aquatic Habitat Issues 130 4.2.7 FHWA Perspective and Guidance 134 4.2.8 Engineering Liability Issues 135 4.3 Guidelines for Specific Treatments 135 4.3.1 Live Siltation and Live Staking with Rock Toe 146 4.3.2 Vegetated Mechanically Stabilized Earth Without Hard Toe 151 4.3.3 Vegetated RiprapâAn Overview 157 4.4 Applications 157 4.4.1 Overview 157 4.4.2 Arid Region Example 175 4.4.3 Humid Region Example 184 4.5 Appraisal of Results 184 4.5.1 Advances in the State of Practice 187 4.5.2 Observations from the Survey of Practitioners 188 4.5.3 Observations and Lessons Learned from the Field Site Visits
192 Chapter 5 Conclusions and Suggested Research 192 5.1 Conclusions and Suggested Research 192 5.1.1 Conclusions 194 5.1.2 Deliverables 194 5.2 Implementation Plan 194 5.2.1 The Product 194 5.2.2 The Market 195 5.2.3 Impediments to Implementation 195 5.2.4 Leadership in Application 195 5.2.5 Activities for Implementation 196 5.2.6 Criteria for Success 196 5.3 Applicability of Results to Highway Practice 196 5.4 Suggested Research 199 References A-1 Appendix A NCHRP Report 544 Findings on Selected Treatments B-1 Appendix B Survey Form C-1 Appendix C Field Data Form Note: Photographs, figures, and tables in this report may have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.