My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-10-06_PERMIT FILE - C1980005 (16)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1980005
>
2009-10-06_PERMIT FILE - C1980005 (16)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:56:02 PM
Creation date
11/12/2009 10:42:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980005
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
10/6/2009
Doc Name
Postmining Drainage Control
Section_Exhibit Name
Tab 07 Appendix 7-12
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
Under short grass conditions, the channel is more prone to being eroded than during tall grass <br />• conditions. Consequently, stability is evaluated under short grass conditions. Retardance <br />classes of D and E are typically used for stability analysis of vegetated channels. <br />Tall grass conditions are used to determine channel capacity. The tall grass affords a great <br />deal of resistance to channel flow as a function of stem base) area and by laying over during <br />high flows. The higher the resistance, the higher elevation of flowing water in the channel. <br />Retardance classes of A through C (especially A and B) are used for capacity analysis. <br />SCC used rtardance values of Class D for stability and Class B for capacity. <br />Freeboard <br />In accordance with Rule 4.05.3, SCC designed all postmine channels with a minimum <br />freeboard of 0.3 feet. <br />The minimum channel designs for the vegetated channels are summarized on the Channel <br />Design Schedule table at the front of Appendix B. SEDCAD4 demonstrations are presented in <br />Appendix B. <br />2.2.2 Rock Riprap Designs <br />Prior to 2007, all unstable channel reaches (e.g., flow velocities greater than 5 fps) were <br />armored with rock riprap. Riprap size was determined using the SEDCAD+ riprap lined <br />channel sub-routine, utilizing either the Simons/OSM (Simons, et al., 1982) or PARER <br />(Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, Stover, 1990) method. <br />The minimum channel designs for the rock riprap lined channels are summarized on the <br />Channel Design Schedule table at the front of Appendix B. Given the uncertainty in <br />determining riprap Dso for steep slopes with the PARER Method, SCC adds an additional 3- <br />inches to the model recommended Dso size. SEDCAD4 demonstrations are presented in <br />Appendix B. <br />2.2.3 Turf Reinforcement Mat Design <br />Turf Reinforcement Mats (TRMs) allow vegetation to be used in areas where flow conditions <br />exceed the limits of natural vegetation (e.g., limiting velocities greater than 5 fps). They can be <br />used for steeper slopes (1.SH:1 V, or flatter) and under medium to high flow conditions. <br />In select situations SCC may use TRMs as an alternative channel lining. Typical matting <br />construction consists of athree-dimensional corrugated matrix (with either coconut/straw or <br />polypropylene fiber) that will anchor and reinforce roots and stems for long-term stability. In <br />addition, the TRM deflects flowing water away from [be soil surface and increases the surface <br />roughness. <br />TR-4 ] 7-12-7 Revised 04/07 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.