My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE125463
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
300000
>
PERMFILE125463
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:22:51 PM
Creation date
11/25/2007 1:56:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982056
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Section_Exhibit Name
EXHIBIT 26a(1) Refuse Pile, Rock Check Dam Design
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL MAJOR DRAINAGE <br />• fabric. Seepage parallel with the fabric might be reduced by folding <br />the edge of the fabric vertically downward about 2 feet (similar to a <br />cutoff wall) at 12-foot intervals along the installation, particularly <br />at the entrance and exit of the channel reach. Filter fabric has to <br />be lapped a minimum of 12 inches at roll edges with upstream fabric <br />being pi aced on top of downstream fabric at the lap. <br />Fine silt and clay has been found to clog the openings in filter <br />fabric. This prevents free drainage which increases failure potential <br />due to uplift. For this reason, a double granular filter is often a <br />more appropriate bedding for fine silt and clay channel beds. See <br />Figures 5-3 a through 5-3 c for details on acceptable use of filter <br />fabric as bedding. <br />5.4 Channel Linings <br />Channel linings constructed from ordinary riprap, grouted riprap, <br />or wire encased rock to control channel erosion have been found to be <br />• cost effective where channel reaches are relatively short (less than <br />1/4 mile). Situations for which riprap linings might be appropriate ~~ <br />are: 1) where major flows, such as the 100-year flood are found to ` <br />produce channel velocities in excess of allowable non-eroding values <br />(5 feet per second for sandy soil conditions and 7 feet per second in <br />erosion resistant soils); 2) where channel side slopes must be steeper <br />than 3:1; 3) for low flow channels, and 4) where rapid changes in <br />channel geometry occur such as channel bends and transitions. Design <br />criteria applicable to these situations are presented in this section. <br />Section 5.4 emphasizes design requirements associated with ordinary <br />riprap, while Section 5.5 contains additional design considerations <br />specifically related to wire enclosed rock. Both Sections 5.4 and <br />5.5 are valid only for subcritical flow conditions where *.he Froude <br />number is 0.8 or less. <br />5.4.1 Roughness Coefficient <br />• The Manning's roughness coefficient (n) for hydraulic computa- <br />tions has been found to be about 0.035 for wire enclosed rock and may <br />~4' <br />11 1G A7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.