BankStabilizationandImprovementofHuronCreekintheKestnerWaterfrontPark

Houghton,Michigan

ParkDescription
TheKestnerWaterfrontParkislocatedwithinthecitylimitsofHoughton,MichiganalongPortageLake.Duetoitssceniclocation
andamplefacilities,theparkisoneofthemostpopularinthecity.Facilitiesincludeaswimmingbeach,launchsiteforkayaksand
sailboats,anextensiveplaygroundarea,picnictables,grillsandalakesidewalkingpath.AnRVparkislocatedimmediatelytothe
west,andboatdockingandlaunchingfacilitiesarelocatedimmediatelytotheeastoftheparkproper.Theparkalsohasapavilion
andbandshell,makingitaprimelocationformanyoutdooreventsandgatherings.Aphotoofthenorthsideoftheparkisprovided
asFigure1below.

Figure1KestnerWaterfrontPark Figure2HuronCreekinPark,September2007
PurposeoftheProject
TheprimarygoalofthisprojectistoimprovethechannelofHuronCreekinKestnerWaterfrontParktoprovideslopestabilityand
moreattractive,naturalizedstreambanks.HuronCreektravelsthroughtheKestnerwaterfrontparkforapproximately350feet
beforeflowingintothePortagewaterwaybeneathaconcretewalkway.Historicallytherehavebeenrepeatedproblemswiththe
banksofHuronCreekwashingoutfromerosionduringstorms.AseverestorminSeptember2007causedseveralbankareasto
completelyfail(Figure2)resultinginsteep,undercutandunprotectedslopes.Variousmethodshavebeenusedtoattemptto
stabilizethebanksovertheyearsincludingriprap,herbaceousplantingsanderosionmattingwithlawngrass.Eachmethodhas
eventuallygivenwaytobankerosion.
Inanattempttorepairthebanksandideallystabilizethempermanently,theCityofHoughtonisproposingtoimplement
biotechnicalstabilizationalongthebankareasintheparkasshownintheattachedFigure3.Thestabilizationwillconsistofthree
components:(a)installationofrockfilledgabionsatthetoeofthebankslopestoprotectagainsterosionduringhighflowevents;
(b)regradingthebankslopestogradesofbetween3H:1Vand2H:1V;and(c)plantingtheslopesandgabionswithnativetrees,
shrubsandgrasses.
EssentialElementsofProject
ThefollowingitemsdescribethebiotechnicalstabilizationmethodproposedbytheCityofHoughton:
1. Excavateslopesbacktoashallowerangle;3H:1Vwherepossible,otherwise2H:1Vgivenabufferstripwidthof12to18feet.

2. Installtwolevelsofstonefilledgabionsatthetoeoftheslope.Thebottomgabionistobesunkintothecreekbedtoprovide
protectionagainstundercutting.Boththetopandbottomgabionsaretobeinstalledatanangletoprovideagainstthe
potentialforsliding.AtypicalcrosssectionofanimprovedslopeisprovidedasFigure4.

3. Plantnativeshrubsintobankontopofuppergabiontoprovideadditionaltoeandbankstabilization.Thismeasure,alongwith
thelowergabionbeingsunkintothecreekbedwillhelpcoverthegabionstoaddamorenaturallooktothecreekwhile
sufficientlystabilizingit.Figure5showstypicalnativeshrubplacementontopofthegabions.

4. Plantamixtureofnativegrasses,shrubsandtreeswithina12to18footbufferstripalongbiotechnicalstabilizationareas.This
willcontributetobankstabilization,helpcoverandpreventaccesstothegabions,andhelpcreateamorenaturalcreek
corridor.PlantinglocationsanddetailsareprovidedonFigures6and7.Nativeplantspeciesareincludedindrawingnotesand
anattachment.
TheCityofHoughtonacknowledgesthattheMichiganCoastalManagementProgramgenerallydoesnotsupporttheuseofhard
shoreprotectionsuchasgabions.However,afterseveraltriesatstabilization,anddiscussionswithlocalexpertssuchasNatural
ResourceConservationService(NRCS)representatives,itisourconclusionthathardstabilizationatthetoeofthebanksisnecessary
forlongtermsuccess.VelocitiesofHuronCreekintheKestnerWaterfrontParkcanexceedthoseallowedasmaximumforsoft
measuressuchascoirlogsorlonevegetativestabilization.Thesehighvelocitiescanbeattributedtosteeptopographies(surface
slopesexceed10%15%insomelocations)andasignificantamountofurbandevelopmentupstream.
RelationshiptoLargerProjects
ThisproposedprojectisalsobeingcompletedinsupportoftheHuronCreekWatershedManagementPlan(MDEQgranttracking
#20060162)whichisbeingfundedbytheMichiganDepartmentofEnvironmentalQuality.TheMichiganTechnologicalUniversity
(MTU)CenterforWaterandSociety(CWS)isresponsiblefordevelopingthewatershedmanagementplan.Awatershedadvisory
committee(WAC)wasformedin2006aspartofthewatershedmanagementplanningefforts.SincetheKestnerWaterfrontPark
providesoneofthefewplacesinthewatershedwherevisitorscaninteractwiththecreek,itisagoaloftheHuronCreekWAC
thatthislocationbeutilizedtospreadawarenessofthecreekandwatershedmanagement.TheHuronCreekWAChas
recommendedthatimprovingthebanksofthecreekwouldprovideahealthy,visuallyappealingcreekwouldandencourage
supporttoprotectandrestoretheremainderoftheCreek.AninterpretivesigndescribingtheHuronCreekwatershedand
watershedhealthwasinstalledintheparkadjacenttothecreekin2007.
TheMTUCWShasprovideddesigns,calculations,costestimatesanddrawingsforsubmittalwiththisproposalaswellasfor
inclusioninthewatershedmanagementplan.
ImprovementstoHuronCreekintheKestnerWaterfrontParkhavebeensuggestedintheCityofHoughtonsRecreationPlan
20082013(seehttp://www.cityofhoughton.com/news/45.pdf).
RelationshiptoExistingFacilities
IntheKestnerWaterfrontPark,HuronCreekislocatedcentrallybetweenapopularswimmingareaandanothersmallbeachand
boatlaunchingarea.Aftersomestormevents,erodedsedimentanddebriscanbeseenalongthebanksanddischargingfromthe
mouthofthecreekintoPortageLaketowardstheseareas.Thiscancreatevisuallydispleasingconditionsattheselocations,aswell
asnegativelyaffectthewaterquality.
ProjectBudget

Gabionmaterialsandinstallation $48,000
Bankgrading $15,000
Grass,shrubs,trees,fertilizerandinstallation $12,500
Erosionmat,stakesandinstallation $6,500
TOTAL $82,000
FundingSource
LocalmatchforthisprojectincludesfundsappropriatedbytheCityofHoughtonforthecityrecreationplanandinkindlabor.
A: 120 ft
Fi 3
outlet
N
Stabilize
B: 130 ft
Stabilize
Figure 3:
Plan View
all dimensions are
approximate
C: 30 ft - Stabilize
D: 50 ft - Open
approximate
scale: approx.60 ft /in
parking
E: 80 ft - Open
G: 50 ft - Stabilize
pa g
lot
sidewalks
F: 50 ft - Stabilize
I: 55 ft - Stabilize
sidewalks
campground
H: 50 ft -Stabilize
campground
road
Fi 4
Staked erosion
bl k t t
set second
Figure 4:
Typical Bank
Cross-Section
plant slopes with native
grass, shrubs and trees
blanket to cover
newly graded surface
> 2:1
cut slopes back to
3H:1V if possible
gabion
back ~ 9 in
all dimensions are
approximate
(otherwise 2H:1V)
finish slope to outward end of
gabions
bed
creek
~ 5 ft
Two (2) ~3 ft x 3 ft x 6 ft (H x W x L)
galvanized gabions, rotated minimum of
6. Fill with 4 to 8 in stone.
excavate
gabion ~ 2 ft
6 . Fill with 4 to 8 in stone.
gabion ~ 2 ft
below bed
filter cloth placed under, on top of
and behind gabions
Figure 5:
Examples of Shrub Placement in or on Gabions
slope
Shrubs to be planted 2 per
stack of 6-foot long gabions
creek
slope
(see detail)
bed
Shrub Planting Detail (view from creek or bank)
2 2 2
Ball-stock shrubs (w/
root ball included)
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/unpavedroads/ch5.pdf
Gabions
Figure 6: Vegetation Details
refer to Figures 3 and 8 for location
Typical Vegetative Buffer Stabilize
Typical Vegetative Buffer
All dimensions are approximate. Shrub and tree placement shown is not exact - for figurative purposes only.
Shrubs can be live stakes or balled stock (root ball included). See notes for more planting information.
yp g
12-18 ft
Open
Erosion mat
over entire
buffer
Erosion mat
over entire
buffer
NO
gabions
Plant native
grasses and
shrub density:
~ 1 shrub per
3-5 sq. ft
forbs only
Native grasses and
forbs intermixed
among shrubs and
trees (hatching not
sho n)
trees
shrubs
grasses
shown)
scale: approx. 25 ft /in
gabions
& forbs
A
Fi 7
outlet
B
Figure 7:
Plan View with
Improvements
C
see Figures 6 and 7 for
details on sections A, B, C,
D, and E
scale: approx.60 ft /in
parking
C
D
E
pa g
lot
sidewalks
F
G
trees
shrubs
I
sidewalks
campground
shrubs
H
I
campground
road
NOTES:
1. Bank planting & grading areas should be kept to a maximum12-foot width near sidewalks
(Areas E and F).
2. Bank slopes shall be graded to 3H:1V where possible, otherwise 2H:1V.
3. If sediments from the creek bed are mechanically removed as part of regular park
maintenance ensure that 2 feet of bed cover remains next to the bottom of the gabions to maintenance, ensure that 2 feet of bed cover remains next to the bottom of the gabions to
keep them in place.
4. GABIONS:
Nearest supplier of Macaferri gabions is CSI Geoturf Contact: David Ringle.
Phone: (231)943-4002 ( )
657 W. Blue Star Drive, Traverse City, Michigan 49684
Technical support and CAD drawings (sometimes for free for public projects):
Macaferri Gabions
Ken Hughes/Tersea Lynch 2351 Versailles Rd., Ste. 302 Lexington, KY 40504
E M il k ffi @ f i T l h 859 255 1343 E-Mail: koffice@maccaferri-usa.comTelephone: 859.255.1343
See attached Macaferri specification sheet for gabions sizing and installation information.
5. See attached U.S. Army Corps of Engineers document SR-22, Gabions for Streambank
Erosion Control for installation recommendations Erosion Control for installation recommendations.
6. Cost provided for gabions is for galvanized gabions only (not PVC-coated). Cost includes
shipping and enough wire for gabion assembly. Can also purchase hog rings for connection
that can be easier to use/install- additional cost for 90 gabions ~ $700.00.
7. GRASSES:
a) A suggested mesic (tolerant to dry and wet conditions) seed mix is attached. This
seed mix has been provided by Borealis Seed Co., Marquette, MI. (906) 226-8507.
b) Suggested application rate = 1 lb/3,000 sq.ft. Plant throughout vegetated area.
NOTES (continued):
8. SHRUBS:
a) Suggested species of shrubs: a) Suggested species of shrubs:
red-osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera)
ninebark (Physocarpus opulifolius)
upland willow (Salix humilis)
pussy willow (Salix discolor)
b) *Shrubs planted on top of gabions should be balled stock for best establishment. Shrubs b) Shrubs planted on top of gabions should be balled stock for best establishment. Shrubs
planted on bank can be balled stock or live stakes. Live stakes are less expensive, but balled
stock establishes more quickly. Also live stakes look, initially less visually appealing.
9. TREES:
a) Suggested species of trees:
red maple (Acer rubrum)
quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides)
white or paper birch (Betula papyrifera)
10. EROSION BLANKET & STAKES:
a) Curlex HV (High Velocity) Straw/Coconut mat or similar is recommended www curlex com a) Curlex HV (High Velocity) Straw/Coconut mat or similar is recommended. www.curlex.com.
b) 6 wire stakes are recommended for fastening to bank. See manufacturer instructions for
proper installation.
c) Erosion blanket to be installed and secured after seeding and fertilization.
11. Suppliers of Trees, Shrubs and Erosion Mat: pp ,
a) Lake Superior Tree Farm, Chassell,MI, 906-523-6200 (Contact: David Crouch)
b) Great Lakes Nursery, Watervliet, MI, 269-468-3323, www.greatlakesnurseryco.com/
c) Cold Stream Nursery, Free Soil, MI, 231-464-5809, www.coldstreamfarm.net/
d) Engels Nursery, Fennville, MI, 296-543-4123, www.engelsnursery.com/
e) *Follow vegetation supplier instructions for planting, fertilization and care.
10. Fertilizer should be applied to bank area when planting vegetation. 3/10/10 fertilizer is
recommended. Slow-release fertilizers are not recommended. Follow manufacturer application
instructions closely.
ERDC TN-EMRRP SR-22 1
Low Moderate High
Complexity
Low Moderate High
Environmental Value
Low Moderate High
Cost
Gabions for Streambank
Erosion Control
by Gary E. Freeman
1
and J. Craig Fischenich
2
May 2000

1
River Research and Design, Inc., 1092 N. 75 E., Orem, UT 84057
2
USAE Waterways Experiment Station, 3909 Halls Ferry Rd., Vicksburg, MS 39180
OVERVIEW
Gabions are cylinders that are filled with earth
or stones, which are used in building structures
such as dams or dikes. Gabions have been
used for several millennia in Egypt and China.
Prior to 1879, gabions were constructed with
plant materials, which severely limited their
useful life. In about 1879 a firm in Italy is
thought to have first used wire mesh in the
construction of gabion baskets. This is
possibly the first use of the modern wire mesh
baskets as used today. Gabions are now used
throughout the world for bed protection, bank
stabilization, retaining walls, and numerous
other purposes.
Gabions come in three basic forms, the gabion
basket, gabion mattress, and sack gabion. All
three types consist of wire mesh baskets filled
with cobble or small boulder material. The fill
normally consists of rock material but other
materials such as bricks have been used to fill
the baskets. The baskets are used to maintain
stability and to protect streambanks and beds.
The difference between a gabion basket and a
gabion mattress is the thickness and the aerial
extent of the basket. A sack gabion is, as the
name implies, a mesh sack that is filled with
rock material. The benefit of gabions is that
they can be filled with rocks that would
individually be too small to withstand the
erosive forces of the stream. The gabion
mattress is shallower (0.5 to 1.5 ft) than the
basket and is designed to protect the bed or
banks of a stream against erosion.
Gabion baskets are normally much thicker
(about 1.5 to 3 ft) and cover a much smaller
area. They are used to protect banks where
mattresses are not adequate or are used to
stabilize slopes (Figure 1), construct drop
structures, pipe outlet structures, or nearly any
other application where soil must be protected
from the erosive forces of water. References to
gabions in this article refer generally to both
mattresses and baskets. Sack gabions are
rarely
Figure 1. Gabion baskets installed for
slope stabilization along a stream
used in the United States and are not within the
scope of this technical note.
Gabion baskets can be made from either
welded or woven wire mesh. The wire is
normally galvanized to reduce corrosion but
may be coated with plastic or other material to
prevent corrosion and/or damage to the wire
mesh containing the rock fill. New materials
2 ERDC TN-EMRRP SR-22
such as Tensar, a heavy-duty polymer plastic
material, have been used in some applications
in place of the wire mesh. If the wire baskets
break, either through corrosion, vandalism, or
damage from debris or bed load, the rock fill in
the basket can be lost and the protective value
of the method endangered.
Gabions are often used where available rock
size is too small to withstand the erosive and
tractive forces present at a project site. The
available stone size may be too small due to
the cost of transporting larger stone from
remote sites, or the desire to have a project
with a smoother appearance than obtained
from riprap or other methods. Gabions also
require about one third the thickness of
material when compared to riprap designs.
Riprap is often preferred, however, due to the
low labor requirements for its placement.
The science behind gabions is fairly well
established, with numerous manufacturers
providing design methodology and guidance for
their gabion products. Dr. Stephen T. Maynord
of the U.S. Army Engineer Research and
Development Center in Vicksburg, Mississippi,
has also conducted research to develop design
guidance for the installation of gabions. Two
general methods are typically used to
determine the stability of gabion baskets in
stream channels, the critical shear stress
calculation and the critical velocity calculation.
A software package known as CHANLPRO has
been developed by Dr. Maynord (Maynord et
al. 1998).
Manufacturers have generated extensive
debate regarding the use and durability of
welded wire baskets versus woven wire
baskets in project design and construction.
Project results seem to indicate that
performance is satisfactory for both types of
mesh.
The rocks contained within the gabions provide
substrates for a wide variety of aquatic
organisms. Organisms that have adapted to
living on and within the rocks have an excellent
home, but vegetation may be difficult to
establish unless the voids in the rocks
contained within the baskets are filled with soil.
If large woody vegetation is allowed to grow in
the gabions, there is a risk that the baskets will
break when the large woody vegetation is
uprooted or as the root and trunk systems
grow. Thus, it is normally not acceptable to
allow large woody vegetation to grow in the
baskets. The possibility of damage must be
weighed against the desirability of vegetation
on the area protected by gabions and the
stability of the large woody vegetation.
If large woody vegetation is kept out of the
baskets, grasses and other desirable
vegetation types may be established and
provide a more aesthetic and ecologically
desirable project than gabions alone.
PLANNING
The first step in the planning process is to
ascertain whether gabions are the appropriate
tool to meet project objectives and constraints
related to stability and habitat. Team members
conducting this assessment should include
hydraulic engineers, biologists, geologists,
landscape architects, and others that have an
understanding of stream restoration, fluvial
geomorphology, and vegetation and habitat
requirements.
Numerous questions must be addressed by the
team including, but not limited to, the following
interrelated items:
1) Are gabions the appropriate tools given
the magnitude of the erosion problem?
2) Are stream velocities and shear stresses
permissible?
3) Is there danger to the wire mesh from
floating debris, sharp bed load, or from
vandalism?
4) Will site conditions during construction
permit installation?
5) Have consequences of failure been
considered and what are they, e.g., what
happens if one or several baskets
becomes dislodged and move downstream
or break open?
6) Can and will the sponsor repair the
baskets in a timely manner when
necessary?
7) Are there areas that must be protected to
prevent erosion damage from the upper
bank areas behind the gabions?
ERDC TN-EMRRP SR-22 3
8) Are the project costs acceptable?
Costs for gabion projects are among the
highest for streambank erosion and bank
stabilization techniques. Costs for the baskets
vary by size and depth but are on the order of
$1.50 to $3.20/ft
2
(all figures in 1999 dollars) for
3-ft-deep baskets, $1.25 to $2.00/ft
2
for
18-in.-deep baskets, and $1.10 to $1.75/ft
2
for
12-in.-deep baskets. Closure items for the
baskets are normally included and prices also
vary with the gauge of the wire, with heavier
wire being more expensive. Baskets can be
ordered in custom sizes for a higher price.
Keys or tiebacks, if required, stone, backfill,
and vegetation plugs, if any, add to material
costs but vary with design and availability.
Total project cost is estimated at about $150.00
to $450.00/yd
3
of protection. This includes the
baskets, assembly and filling the baskets,
stone fill (may vary depending on location and
availability), and basket closure.
Basket installation does not always require
heavy equipment but the filling and closure of
the baskets can be very labor-intensive and a
good crew should be planned to complete
installation in a timely manner.
SITE CONSIDERATIONS
Gabions are suited to a variety of site
conditions. They can be used in perennial or
ephemeral streams, and installation can occur
in dry or wet conditions with the proper
equipment. The main concern is the delivery
and handling of the baskets and rock fill. If wet
conditions exist for long periods of time in the
area surrounding the site, the delivery of rock
materials may be impossible or extremely
problematic.
The most important consideration for the
installation of gabions is the stability of the
stream. If the stream is undergoing rapid
changes in base elevation (down- cutting or
deposition) or extreme lateral movement, plans
should be made to correct the larger problems
that are contributing to the local problem. If the
larger problems are not addressed, local
protection measures may be overwhelmed or
flanked.
Foundation conditions are also important in site
selection because the gabions must have a
firm foundation. If the substrate is noncohesive
material, such as sand or silt, the material may
be removed through the gabions and cause
settlement or flanking to occur. Installation of a
filter material or filter fabric should be
considered in every project. Filter material
should only be omitted if it is clearly not
needed. Some projects may require a filter
fabric as well as a gravel filter material to
prevent erosion of the underlying bank and bed
material. An additional and extremely important
consideration is the calculation of the amount
of erosion to be expected in a project. This
should be calculated to ensure that the
foundation for the gabions is not undercut due
to scour.
DESIGN
Primary design considerations for gabions and
mattresses are: 1) foundation stability; 2)
sustained velocity and shear-stress thresholds
that the gabions must withstand; and 3) toe and
flank protection. The base layer of gabions
should be placed below the expected maximum
scour depth. Alternatively, the toe can be
protected with mattresses that will fall into any
scoured areas without compromising the
stability of the bank or bed protection portion of
the project. If bank protection does not extend
above the expected water surface elevation for
the design flood, measures such as tiebacks to
protect against flanking should be installed.
The use of a filter fabric behind or under the
gabion baskets to prevent the movement of soil
material through the gabion baskets is an
extremely important part of the design process.
This migration of soil through the baskets can
cause undermining of the supporting soil
structure and failure of the gabion baskets and
mattresses.
Primary Design Considerations
The major consideration in the design of gabion
structures is the expected velocity at the gabion
face. The gabion must be designed to
withstand the force of the water in the stream.
4 ERDC TN-EMRRP SR-22
Since gabion mattresses are much shallower
and more subject to movement than gabion
baskets, care should be taken to design the
mattresses such that they can withstand the
forces applied to them by the water. However,
mattresses have been used in application
where very high velocities are present and
have performed well. But, projects using
gabion mattresses should be carefully
designed.
The median stone size for a gabion mattress
can be determined from the following equation:
5 . 2
1
5 . 0
1
1
]
1

,
_

gdK
V
d C C S d
w s
w
v s f m

(1)
The variables in the above equation are
defined as:
C
s
= stability coefficient (use 0.1)
C
v
= velocity distribution coefficient
= 1.283-0.2 log (R/W) (minimum
of 1.0) and equals 1.25 at end
of dikes and concrete channels
d
m
= average rock diameter in gabions
d = local flow depth at V
g = acceleration due to gravity
K
1
= side slope correction factor
(Table 1)
R = centerline bend radius of main
channel flow
S
f
= safety factor (1.1 minimum)
V = depth-averaged velocity
W = water surface width of main
channel

s
= unit weight of stone

w
= unit weight of water
Table 1. K1 versus Side Slope Angle
Side Slope K1
1V : 1H 0.46
1V : 1.5H 0.71
1V : 2H 0.88
1V : 3H 0.98
<1V : 4H 1.0
This equation was developed to design stone
size such that the movement of filler stone in
the mattresses is prevented. This eliminates
deformation that can occur when stone sizes
are not large enough to withstand the forces of
the water. The result of mattress deformation
(Figure 2) is stress on the basket wire and
increases in resistance to flow and the
likelihood of basket failure. The upper portion
of Figure 2 shows an undeformed gabion, while
the lower portion shows how gabions deform
under high-velocity conditions.
Figure 2. Gabion mattress showing
deformation of mattress pockets under high
velocities (courtesy Maccaferri Gabions)
Maccaferri Gabions offers a table in their
materials giving guidance on sizing stone and
allowable velocities for gabion baskets and
mattresses. This is shown in Table 2.
ERDC TN-EMRRP SR-22 5
Table 2. Stone Sizes and Allowable Velocities for Gabions (courtesy of and adapted from
Maccaferri Gabions)
Type Thickness (ft) Filling Stone
Range
D50 Critical*
Velocity
Limit**
Velocity
Mattress 0.5
0.5
0.75
0.75
1
1
3 - 4"
3 - 6"
3 - 4"
3 - 6"
3 - 5"
4 - 6"
3.4"
4.3"
3.4"
4.7"
4"
5"
11.5
13.8
14.8
14.8
13.6
16.4
13.8
14.8
16
20
18
21
Basket 1.5
1.5
4 - 8"
5 - 10"
6"
7.5"
19
21
24.9
26.2
When the data in Table 2 are compared to
Equation 1, if V = 11.5, C
s
= 0.1, C
v
= 1.0, K
1
=
0.71,
w
= 150 and S
f
= 1.1, the local flow depth
must be on the order of 25 ft in order to arrive
at the stone diameter of 3.4 in. shown in Table
2. Designers should use Equation 1 to take the
depth of flow into account. Table 2 does,
however, give some general guidelines for fill
sizes and is a quick reference for maximum
allowable velocities.
Maccaferri also gives guidance on the stability
of gabions in terms of shear stress limits. The
following equation gives the shear for the bed
of the channel:
Sd
w b
(2)
with the bank shear
m
taken as
75 percent of the bed shear, i.e.
m
= 0.75
b
.
(S is the bed or water surface slope through the
reach.) These values are then compared to the
critical stress for the bed calculated by the
following equation:
( )
m w s c
d 10 . 0 (3)
with critical shear stress for the banks given as:
4304 . 0
sin
1
2

c s
(4)
where = the angle of the bank rotated up from
horizontal.
A design is acceptable if
b
<
c
and
m
<
s
. if
either
b
>
c
or
m
>
s
, then a check must be
made to see if they are less than 120 percent
of
b
and
s
. If the values are less than 120
percent of
b
and
s
, the gabions will not be
subject to more than what Maccaferri defines
as acceptable deformation. However, it is
recommended that stone size be increased to
limit deformation if possible.
Research has indicated that stone in the
gabion mattress should be sized such that the
largest stone diameter is not more than about
two times the diameter of the smallest stone
diameter and the mattress should be at least
twice the depth of the largest stone size. The
size range should, however, vary by about a
factor of two to ensure proper packing of the
stone material into the gabions. Since the
mattresses normally come in discrete sizes, i.e.
0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 ft in depth, normal practice is
to size the stone and then select the basket
depth that is deep enough to be at least two
times the largest stone diameter. The smallest
stone should also be sized such that it cannot
pass through the wire mesh.
Stability of Underlying Bed and Bank
Materials. Another critical consideration is the
stability of the gabion foundation. This includes
both geotechnical stability and the resistance of
the soil under the gabions to the erosive forces
6 ERDC TN-EMRRP SR-22
of the water moving through the gabions. If
there is any question regarding the stability of
the foundation, i.e. possibility of rotational
failures, slip failures, etc., a qualified
geotechnical engineer should be consulted
prior to and during the design of the
bank/channel protection. Several
manufacturers give guidance on how to check
for geotechnical failure (see Maccaferri
Gabions brochure as an example).
Stacked gabion baskets used for bank stability
should be tilted towards the soil they are
protecting by a minimum of about 6 deg from
vertical. Gabions are stacked using two
methods. These are shown in Figure 3. While
the gabions can be stacked with no tilt, it is
recommended that some tilt into the soil being
protected be provided.
Figure 3. Front step and rear step gabion
layout (courtesy of Maccaferri Gabions)
One of the critical factors in determining
stability is the velocity of the water that passes
through the gabions and reaches the soil
behind the gabion. The water velocity under
the filter fabric, i.e. water that moves through
the gabions and filter fabric, is estimated to be
one-fourth to one-half of the velocity at the
mattress/filter interface. (Simons, Chen, and
Swenson 1984) The velocity at the
mattress/filter interface (V
b
) is estimated to be
2 / 1
3 / 2
2
486 . 1
S
d
n
V
m
f
b

,
_

(5)
where n
f
= 0.02 for filter fabric, 0.022 for gravel
filter material and S is the water surface slope
(or bed slope) through the reach. If the
underlying soil material is not stable, additional
filter material must be installed under the
gabions to ensure soil stability. Maccaferri also
provides guidance on the stability of soil under
the gabions in terms of velocity criteria.
The limit for velocity on the soil is different for
each type of soil. The limit for cohesive soils is
obtained from a chart, while maximum
allowable velocities for other soil types are
obtained by calculating V
e
, the maximum
velocity allowable at the soil interface, and
comparing it to V
f
, the residual velocity on the
bed, i.e. under the gabion mattress and under
the filter fabric.
V
e
for loose soils is equal to 16.1d
1/2
while V
f
is
calculated by:
2 / 1
3 / 2
2
486 . 1
a
m
f
f
SV
d
n
V

,
_

(6)
where V
a
is the average channel velocity and
d
m
is the average rock diameter.
If V
f
is larger than two to four times V
e
, a gravel
filter is required to further reduce the water
velocity at the soil interface under the gabions
until V
f
is in an acceptable range. To check for
the acceptability of the filter use the average
gravel size for d
m
in Equation 6. If the velocity
V
f
is still too high, the gravel size should be
reduced to obtain an acceptable value for V
f
.
Other Design Considerations
It may be possible to combine gabions with
less harsh methods of bank protection on the
upper bank and still achieve the desired result
of a stable channel. Provisions for large woody
vegetation and a more aesthetically pleasing
project may also be used on the upper banks
or within the gabions (Figure 4). However, the
stability of vegetation or other upper bank
protection should be carefully analyzed to
ensure stability of the upper bank area. A
failure in the upper bank region can adversely
affect gabion stability and lead to project
failure.
CONSTRUCTION
A gabion project is installed by first smoothing
the area to be protected to the desired final
slope. The filter fabric and any required gravel
filter are then installed according to the design
plans.
ERDC TN-EMRRP SR-22 7
Figure 4. Woody vegetation used within
the gabion architecture (Coppin and
Richards 1990)
The gabions are next assembled and tied
together, folded flat, stacked, and bundled
by the supplier. They are bent into the
design form, and all ends and diaphragms
are laced into place. The assembled
gabions are then placed in their proper
location and laced (tied) to all surrounding
gabions. It is important that all adjacent
gabions be laced together. This prevents
movement and the failure of a project due
to the loss of one basket out of a protected
area. Lacing should occur in accordance
with the manufacturer's recommendations.
After a sufficient number of gabions are
assembled, filling can start. The fill should be
placed carefully in the gabions to prevent
damage to the diaphragms and edges. Filling
should be done in lifts of no more than 12 in.
and some hand adjustment may be required to
obtain a smooth attractive face. For gabion
baskets with heights greater than 12 in., tie
wires or stiffeners are recommended after each
lift to prevent exposed faces from bulging (see
Figure 5).
Figure 5. Stiffener installation to prevent bulging faces (courtesy Hilfiker Retaining Walls)
After filling, the covers are placed on the
gabions and secured with tie wires (laced).
The gabions can be seeded with grass or other
cover vegetation if the soil is intermixed with
the lifts of stone and if the hydrology is not
limiting. Again, large woody vegetation should
be avoided in the area protected by gabions.
8 ERDC TN-EMRRP SR-22
Care should be taken to determine soil
properties if the gabions are to be covered. If
the soil is saline or acidic, deterioration of the
gabion wire can occur rapidly, leading to
project failure.
If the soil has a lower permeability than the
underlying bank material, water may not be
able to move readily through the gabions,
resulting in hydrostatic pressure behind the
gabions. This can cause a sliding or rotational
failure of the gabions. If the soil that is placed
on the gabions is porous enough to allow easy
passage of water through the gabion, it may
not retain enough water to support the desired
vegetation.
If a grass cover can be established over
gabions, it is possible that the grass will remain
stable during high flows since the root system
will be firmly attached to the gabion mesh and
underlying rock fill. The problems of adequate
moisture and sufficient permeability of the soil
need to be carefully investigated.
While gabions may be able to support some
types of vegetation, care should be used when
recommending covering and filling the gabions
with intermixed soil and rock to support
vegetation.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Gabions need to be checked for broken wires
and repaired if necessary to protect stone
contained in the gabions from being removed
by the force of water passing the cage.
Any large woody vegetation that has started to
grow in the gabions should be removed and
any damage to the gabions repaired. This may
include replacing lost stone and repairing any
damaged wire with wire similar to that used in
the construction of the cages.
The project area should be monitored for signs
of erosion. If erosion is occurring at the toe of
the gabion structures, measures should be
taken to protect the gabions from undercutting
and subsequent failure. If water is eroding soil
from behind a gabion wall, either the water
needs to be diverted or measures need to be
taken to eliminate the erosion of soil from
behind the gabions. This often occurs where
surface runoff enters the stream at a location
that is protected by gabions.
The project should be monitored for any signs
of geotechnical failure. If any of the gabions
have shifted or appear to be bulging away from
the bank, measures should be taken to
evaluate the seriousness of the problem. If
proper geotechnical evaluations and measures
are taken during the design and construction
stages, there should be little chance of a major
problem due to geotechnical failures.
APPLICABILITY AND
LIMITATIONS
The aesthetics of gabions are not as desirable
as some other types of protective measures
such as re-vegetation, but where the damages
and dangers associated with failures is high, or
where serious erosion problems exist that
cannot be controlled with other methods,
gabions are a viable alternative.
Caution should be exercised in using gabions
in areas where there is a high likelihood of
vandalism or damage from in-stream debris
including moving cobble, etc., that can harm
the wire by impact and scour. Under these
conditions, the wire containing the rock fill can
be damaged and the protection lost. Gabions
must also be protected against impact from
large woody debris and sharp objects. These
materials tend to distort and break the gabions.
If large woody vegetation is desired in an area
to be protected by gabions, it may be possible
to use gabions or other methods such as
peaked stone toes to protect the lower bank
and a vegetative treatment on the upper banks.
This can provide for large woody vegetation on
the upper bank and yet provide highly effective
protection of the toe of the bank.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Research presented in this technical note was
developed under the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers Ecosystem Management and
Restoration Research Program. Technical
reviews were provided by Messrs. Jerry L.
Miller and Hollis H. Allen, both of the
Environmental Laboratory.
ERDC TN-EMRRP SR-22 9
POINTS OF CONTACT
For additional information, contact Dr. J.
Craig Fischenich, (601-634-3449,
fischec@wes.army.mil), or the manager of
the Ecosystem Management and
Restoration Research Program, Dr. Russell
F. Theriot (601-634-2733,
therior@wes.army.mil). This technical note
should be cited as follows:
Freeman, G. E., and Fischenich, J.C.
(2000). "Gabions for streambank erosion
control," EMRRP Technical Notes
Collection (ERDC TN-EMRRP-SR-22),
U.S. Army Engineer Research and
Development Center, Vicksburg, MS.
www.wes.army.mil/el/emrrp
REFERENCES
Coppin, ., and Richards, . (1990). Use of
vegetation in civil engineering. Butterworths,
London.
Maynord, S., Hebler, M., and Knight, S. (1998).
Users manual for CHANLPRO, PC program
for channel protection design, Technical
Report CHL-98-20, U.S. Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Simons, D.B., Chen, Y.H., and Swenson, L.J.
(1984). Hydraulic test to develop design
criteria for the use of reno mattresses, Report
prepared for Maccaferri Steel Wire Products,
Ltd., Ontario, Canada. Civil Eng. Dept.,
Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (1994).
Hydraulic design of flood control channels,
Engineer Manual 1110-2-1601, Change 1, 30
June, 1994, Washington, DC.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Gary E. Freeman is President of River
Research and Design, Inc. He holds
bachelor's and master's degrees in Agricultural
and Irrigation Engineering from Utah State
University and a Ph.D. in Civil Engineering from
Texas A&M University. His research has
focused on hydraulics, sedimentation, and
hydraulic uncertainty.
J. Craig Fischenich is a Research Civil
Engineer at the U.S. Army Engineer Research
and Development Center. He holds bachelor's
and Master of Science degrees, respectively, in
Civil and Environmental Engineering from
South Dakota School of Mines and
Technology, and a Ph.D. in Hydraulics from
Colorado State University. His research has
focused on stream and riparian restoration,
erosion control, and flood damage reduction.
TECHNICAL DATA SHEET
Rev: 01, Issue Date 06.01.2007
GABION
GALVANIZED
Product Description
Gabions are baskets manufactured from 8x10 double twisted
hexagonal woven steel wire mesh, as per ASTM A975-97 (Figs.
1, 2). Gabions are filled with stones at the project site to form
flexible, permeable, monolithic structures such as retaining
walls, channel linings, and weirs for erosion control projects.
The steel wire used in the manufacture of the gabion is heavily
zinc coated soft temper steel. The standard specifications of
mesh-wire are shown in Table 2.
The gabion is divided into cells by diaphragms positioned at
approximately 3 ft (0.9 m) centers (Fig.1). To reinforce the
structure, all mesh panel edges are selvedged with a wire
having a greater diameter (Table 3). Dimensions and sizes of
galvanized gabions are shown in Table 1.
Gabions shall be manufactured and shipped with all
components mechanically connected at the production facility.

Wire
All tests on wire must be performed prior to manufacturing the
mesh. All wire should comply with ASTM A975-97, style 1
coating. Wire used for the manufacture of Gabions and the
lacing wire, shall have a maximum tensile strength of 75,000 psi
(515 MPa) as per ASTM A641/A641M-03, soft temper steel.


Woven Wire Mesh Type 8x10
The mesh and wire characteristics shall be in accordance with
ASTM A975-97 Table 1, Mesh type 8x10. The nominal mesh
opening D = 3.25 in. (83 mm) as per Fig. 2.
The minimum mesh properties for strength and flexibility should
be in accordance with the following:
Mesh Tensile Strength shall be 3500 lb/ft (51.1 kN/m)
minimum when tested in accordance with ASTM A975-97
section 13.1.1.
Punch Test resistance shall be a minimum of 6000 lb (26.7
kN) when tested in compliance with ASTM A975-97 section
13.1.4 .
Connection to Selvedges should be 1400 lb/ft (20.4 kN/m)
when tested in accordance with ASTM A975-97.

Lacing, Assembly and Installation
Gabion units are assembled and connected to one another
using lacing wire specified in Table 3 and described in Fig. 4.
MacTie preformed stiffeners or lacing wire can be used as
internal connecting wires when a structure requires more than
one layer of gabions to be stacked on top of each other. Internal
connecting wires with lacing wire shall connect the exposed
face of a cell to the opposite side of the cell. Internal connecting
preformed stiffeners shall connect the exposed face of a cell to
the adjacent side of the cell. Preformed stiffeners are installed
at 45to the face/side of the unit, extending an equal distance
along each side to be braced (approximately 1 ft. (300 mm)). An
exposed face is any side of a gabion cell that will be exposed or
unsupported after the structure is completed.
Galvanized steel ring fasteners can be used instead of, or to
complement, the lacing wire (Fig. 5).
Figure 1
Figure 2
The tolerance on the opening
of mesh D being the
distance between the axis of
two consecutive twists, is
according to ASTM A975-97
Figure 3Example of gabion wall
Diaphragm
Back
Lid
End
End
Front
W
H
L
D
American Units
Table 2Standard mesh-wire
Type D in. (mm) Tolerance Wire Dia in. (mm)
8x10/
ZN
3.25 (83) 10% 0.12 (3.05)
Figure 6
A
B
C
Pneumatic
Spenax
tool
Manual tool
All sizes and dimensions are nominal. Tol er ances of 5% of t he wi dt h,
hei ght , and l engt h of t he gabi ons shal l be per mi t t ed.
Maccaferri reserves the right to amend product specifications without notice and specifiers are
requested to check as to the validity of the specifications they are using.
Lid closer
Figure 4
Figure 5
Lacing wire Rings
M
a
x

6

i
n
.



(
1
5
0

m
m
)

Open Closed
1.75 in.
(44 mm)
0
.
7
5

i
n
.

(
1
9

m
m
)

Nominal overlap of 1 in.
(25 mm) after closure
Quantity Request
When requesting a quotation, please specify:
number of units,
size of units (length x width x height, see Table 1),
type of mesh,
type of coating.
EXAMPLE: No. 100 gabions, 6x3x3, Mesh type 8x10,
Galvanized steel rings for galvanized gabions shall be in
accordance with ASTM A975-97 section 6.3.
Spacing of the rings shall be in accordance with ASTM A975-
97 Table 2, Panel to Panel connection, Pull-Apart Resistance.
In any case, ring fasteners spacing shall not exceed 6 in. (150
mm) (Fig. 4).
The rings can be installed using pneumatic or manual tools
(Fig. 6). For full details, please see the Gabion Product
Installation Guide.
Table 3Standard wire diameters

Lacing
Wire
Mesh
Wire
Mesh Diameter
in. (mm)
0.087
(2.20)
0.120
(3.05)
0.153
(3.90)
Wire Tolerance
() in. (mm)
0.004
(0.10)
0.004
(0.10)
0.004
(0.10)
Minimum Qty/Zinc
oz/ft
2
(g/m
2
)
0.70
(214)
0.85
(259)
0.90
(275)
Selvedge Wire /
Preformed
Stiffeners
L=Length ft (m) W=Width ft (m) H=Height ft (m) # of cells
6 (1.8) 3 (0.9) 3 (0.9) 2
9 (2.7) 3 (0.9) 3 (0.9) 3
12 (3.6) 3 (0.9) 3 (0.9) 4
6 (1.8) 3 (0.9) 1.5 (0.45) 2
9 (2.7) 3 (0.9) 1.5 (0.45) 3
12 (3.6) 3 (0.9) 1.5 (0.45) 4
6 (1.8) 3 (0.9) 1 (0.3) 2
9 (2.7) 3 (0.9) 1 (0.3) 3
12 (3.6) 3 (0.9) 1 (0.3) 4
4.5 (1.4) 3 (0.9) 3 (0.9) 1
Table 1Sizes for Gabions
Area Offices:

AZ, Phoenix KY, Lexington NM, Albuquerque
CA, Sacramento MD, Williamsport PR, Caguas
FL, Coral Gables NJ, Ramsey TX, Lewisville
website: www.maccaferri-usa.com
Headquarters:
10303 Governor Lane Boulevard
Williamsport, MD 21795-3116
Tel: 301-223-6910
Fax: 301-223-6134
email: hdqtrs@maccaferri-usa.com
MACCAFERRI INC.
2007 Maccaferri, Inc. Printed in USA
Curlex

Staple Pattern Guide

For 8' wide Curlex Erosion Control Blankets
Adjust horizontal staple spacing for 4', 12', and 16' wide Curlex Erosion Control Blankets
= Staple Placement
B
3'
1.5'
3'
1.1 Staples/yd
2
A
3'
6'
4'
0.6 Staples/yd
2
6'
C
4'
3'
2' 4'
4'
Critical channel points are circled.
1.9 Staples/yd
2
1. Recommended staples are a minimum 4
biodegradable E-Staple

, as provided by American
Excelsior Company, or 6 wire for cohesive soils and 6
biodegradable E-Staple

, as provided by American
Excelsior Company, or 8 wire for non-cohesive soils.
2. Adjust staple pattern so staples are placed in critical
channel points (e.g. slope interface, channel bottom)
as illustrated below:
Notes:
Slope Channel
Application
4:1 3:1 1:1
6.0 lb/ft
2
(288 Pa) Shear Stress
15 ft/sec (4.6 m/sec) Velocity
Staple Pattern A B C C

3'
850 Avenue H East / Arlington, Texas 76011
Phone 1-800-777-SOIL / Fax 817-385-3585 / www.Curlex.com
W0707R1107

Curlex

High Velocity

EROSION CONTROL BLANKET

SPECIFICATION

PART I - GENERAL

1.01 Summary

A. The erosion control blanket contains excelsior wood fiber for the purpose of erosion control and
revegetation as described herein.

B. This work shall consist of furnishing and installing the erosion control blanket; including fine
grading, blanketing, stapling, and miscellaneous related work, in accordance with these standard
specifications and at the locations identified on drawings or designated by the owners
representative. This work shall include all necessary materials, labor, supervision, and equipment
for installation of a complete system.

C. All work of this section shall be performed in accordance with the conditions and requirements of
the contract documents.

D. The erosion control blanket shall be used to prevent surface erosion and enhance revegetation.
Based on a project-by-project engineering analysis, the blanket shall be suitable for the following
applications:

1. Slope protection
2. Channel and ditch linings
3. Reservoir embankments and spillways
4. Culvert inlets and outfalls
5. Dikes, levees, and riverbanks

1.02 Performance Requirements

A. Erosion control blanket shall provide a temporary, biodegradable cover material to reduce slope
and/or channel erosion and enhance revegetation.

B. Blanket performance requirements:

C factor: .022
Shear Stress: 3.25 lb/ft
2
(156 Pa)
Velocity: 11 ft/sec (3.4 m/sec)
Functional Longevity*: 36+ months
*Functional Longevity varies from region to region because of differences in climatic conditions.

1.03 Submittals

A. Submittals shall include complete design data, Product Data Sheets, Product Netting Information,
MSDS, Staple Pattern Guides, Installation Guidelines, Manufacturing Material Specifications,
Manufacturing Certifications, CAD details, and a Manufacturing Quality Control Program. In
addition, the Manufacturer shall provide reference installations similar in size and scope to that
specified for the project.

1.04 Delivery, Storage, and Handling

A. Erosion control blanket shall be furnished in rolls and wrapped with suitable material to protect
against moisture intrusion and extended ultraviolet exposure prior to placement. Each roll shall be
labeled with a date code identification, which allows for sufficient tracking of the product back to
date of manufacturing and for quality control purposes.

B. Erosion control blanket shall be of consistent thickness with fibers distributed evenly over the entire
area of the blanket.

C. Erosion control blanket shall be free of defects and voids that would interfere with proper
installation or impair performance.

D. Erosion control blanket shall be stored by the Contractor in a manner that protects them from
damage by construction activities.

PART II - PRODUCTS

2.01 Erosion Control Blanket

A. Erosion control blanket shall be Curlex High Velocity (HV), as manufactured by American
Excelsior Company, Arlington, TX (1-866-9FIBERS).

B. Curlex HV erosion control blanket consists of a specific cut of 100% weed seed free Great Lakes
Aspen curled wood excelsior with 80% of the fiber 6 inches in length. It is of consistent thickness
with fibers evenly distributed throughout the entire area of the blanket. The top and bottom of each
blanket is covered with heavy duty UV stabilized polypropylene netting. Curlex HV is also
available as QuickGRASS

(Dyed Green), which also adds approximately four pounds to the total
weight of the blanket.













850 Avenue H East Arlington, Texas 76011
Phone 1-800-777-SOIL Fax 817-385-3585 www.Curlex.com
W0707R1207
2
C. Erosion control blanket shall have the following material characteristics:

Width 4.0 ft (1.2 m) 8.0 ft (2.4 m)
Length 100.0 ft (30.5 m) 50.0 ft (15.2 m)
Area 44.4 yd
2
(37.1 m
2
) 44.4 yd
2
(37.1 m
2
)
Weight* 71.9 lb (32.6 kg) 71.9 lb (32.6 kg)
Fiber Count
15,500 per yd
2

(18,600 per m
2
)
15,500 per yd
2

(18,600 per m
2
)
Fiber Length (80% min.) 6.0 in (15.2 cm) 6.0 in (15.2 cm)
Mass per Unit Area
( 10%)
1.62 lb/yd
2
(0.88 kg/m
2
)
1.62 lb/yd
2
(0.88 kg/m
2
)
Net
Openings
Polypropylene
0.75 in x 0.75 in
(19.1 mm x 19.1 mm)
0.75 in x 0.75 in
(19.1 mm x 19.1 mm)

TYPICAL INDEX VALUES**
Index Property Test Method Value
Thickness ASTM D 5199/ECTC 0.54 in (13.72 mm)
Light Penetration ECTC Procedure 20%
Resiliency ASTM D 1777/ECTC 53%
Mass per Unit Area ASTM D 5261/ECTC 1.55 lb/yd
2
(841 g/m
2
)
MD-Tensile Strength Max. ASTM D 5035/ECTC 230.40 lb/ft (3.36 kN/m)
TD-Tensile Strength Max. ASTM D 5035/ECTC 124.80 lb/ft (1.82 kN/m)
MD-Elongation ASTM D 5035/ECTC 28.6%
TD-Elongation ASTM D 5035/ECTC 36.7%
Swell ECTC Procedure 48%
Water Absorption ASTM D 1117/ECTC 194%
Bench-Scale Rain Splash ECTC Method 2 SLR = 5.6 @ 2 in/hr
Bench-Scale Rain Splash ECTC Method 2 SLR = 9.2 @ 4 in/hr
Bench-Scale Rain Splash ECTC Method 2 SLR = 15.4 @ 6 in/hr
Bench-Scale Shear ECTC Method 3 3.1 lb/ft
2
@ 0.5 soil loss
Germination Improvement ECTC Method 4 616%

* Weight is based on a dry fiber weight basis at time of manufacture. Baseline moisture content of Great Lakes Aspen excelsior is 22%.

** SLR is the Soil Loss Ratio, as reported by NTPEP/AASHTO. Bench-scale index values should not be used for design purposes.

2.02 Staples

A. Staples shall be a minimum 4 biodegradable E-Staple

, as provided by American Excelsior

Company, or 6 wire for cohesive soils and 6 biodegradable E-Staple

, as provided by American
Excelsior Company, or 8 wire for non-cohesive soils. All staples shall have a U-shaped top.

PART III - EXECUTION

3.01 Blanket Supplier Representation

A. Contractor shall coordinate with the blanket supplier for a qualified representative to be present at
the job site on the start of installation to provide technical assistance as needed. Contractor shall
remain solely responsible for the quality of installation.

3.02 Site Preparation

A. Before placing erosion control blanket, the Contractor shall certify that the subgrade has been
properly compacted, has been graded smooth, has no depressions, voids, soft or uncompacted areas,
is free from obstructions such as tree roots, protruding stones or other foreign matter, and is seeded
and fertilized according to project specifications. The Contractor shall not proceed until all
850 Avenue H East Arlington, Texas 76011
Phone 1-800-777-SOIL Fax 817-385-3585 www.Curlex.com
W0707R1207
3
unsatisfactory conditions have been remedied. By beginning construction, the Contractor signifies
that the preceding work is in conformance with this specification.

B. Contractor shall fine grade the subgrade by hand dressing where necessary to remove local
deviations.

C. No vehicular traffic shall be permitted directly on the erosion control blanket.

NOTE: Topsoiling, seeding, and fertilizing is not included in this specification.

3.03 Slope Installation

A. Erosion control blanket shall be installed as directed by the owners representative in accordance
with manufacturer's Installation Guidelines, Staple Pattern Guides, and CAD details. The extent of
erosion control blanket shall be as shown on the project drawings.

B. Erosion control blanket shall be orientated in vertical strips and anchored with staples, as identified
in the Staple Pattern Guide. Adjacent strips shall be abutted or overlapped to allow for installation
of a common row of staples that anchor through the nettings of both blankets. Horizontal joints
between erosion control blankets shall be sufficiently overlapped with the uphill end on top for a
common row of staples so that the staples anchor through the nettings of both blankets.

C. Where exposed to overland sheet flow, a trench shall be located at the uphill termination. Erosion
control blanket shall be stapled to the bottom of the trench. The trench shall be backfilled and
compacted. Where feasible, the uphill end of the blanket shall be extended three feet over the crest
of the slope.

D. Slope erosion control blanket shall be overlapped by the channel erosion control blanket sufficiently
for a common row of staples to anchor through the nettings of both blankets when terminating into a
channel.

3.04 Channel Installation

A. Erosion control blanket shall be installed as directed by the owners representative in accordance
with manufacturer's Installation Guidelines, Staple Pattern Guides, and CAD details. The extent of
erosion control blanket shall be as shown on the project drawings.

B. Erosion control blanket shall be installed parallel to the flow of water. The first roll shall be
centered longitudinally in mid-channel and anchored with staples as identified in the Staple Pattern
Guide. Subsequent rolls shall follow from channel center outward and be overlapped to allow
installation of a common row of staples so that the staples anchor through the nettings of both
blankets.

C. Successive lengths of erosion control blanket shall be overlapped sufficiently for a common row of
staples with the upstream end on top. Staple the overlap across the end of each of the overlapping
lengths so that staples anchor through the nettings of both blankets.

D. A termination trench shall be located at the upstream termination. Erosion control blanket shall be
stapled to the bottom of the trench. The trench shall be backfilled and compacted.


850 Avenue H East Arlington, Texas 76011
Phone 1-800-777-SOIL Fax 817-385-3585 www.Curlex.com
W0707R1207
4

3.05 Quality Assurance

A. Erosion control blanket shall not be defective or damaged. Damaged or defective materials shall be
replaced at no additional cost to the owner.

B. Product shall be manufactured in accordance to a documented Quality Control Program. At a
minimum, the following procedures and documentation shall be provided upon request:
1. Manufacturing Quality Control Program Manual
2. First piece inspection and documentation of products produced to assure component
materials and finished product tolerances are within manufacturer specifications.
3. Additional inspections for product conformance shall be conducted during the run after the
first piece inspection.
4. Moisture content readings recorded for each manufacturing day.
5. Recorded weight of every erosion control blanket manufactured.
6. Each individual erosion control blanket shall be inspected, weighed, and documented prior
to packaging for conformance to manufacturing specifications.
7. Documentation and record retention for at least two years.

3.06 Clean-up

A. At the completion of this scope of work, Contractor shall remove from the job site and properly
dispose of all remaining debris, waste materials, excess materials, and equipment required of or
created by Contractor. Disposal of waste materials shall be solely the responsibility of Contractor
and shall be done in accordance with applicable waste disposal regulations.

3.07 Method of Measurement

A. The erosion control blanket shall be measured by the square yard of surface area covered. No
measurement for payment shall be made for overlaps, fine grading, trenching, staples, or other
miscellaneous materials necessary for placement of the erosion control blanket.

3.08 Basis of Payment

A. The accepted quantities of erosion control blanket shall be paid for at the contract unit price per
square yard, complete in place.

Payment shall be made under:

Pay Item Pay Unit
Erosion Control Blanket Square Yards


Disclaimer: Curlex is a system for erosion control and revegetation on slopes and channels. American Excelsior
Company (AEC) believes that the information contained herein to be reliable and accurate for use in erosion control and
re-vegetation applications. However, since physical conditions vary from job site to job site and even within a given job
site, AEC makes no performance guarantees and assumes no obligation or liability for the reliability or accuracy of
information contained herein for the results, safety, or suitability of using Curlex, or for damages occurring in connection
with the installation of any erosion control product whether or not made by AEC or its affiliates, except as separately and
specifically made in writing. These specifications are subject to change without notice.
850 Avenue H East Arlington, Texas 76011
Phone 1-800-777-SOIL Fax 817-385-3585 www.Curlex.com
W0707R1207
5

Live Stake and Joint
Planting for Streambank
Erosion Control
by Robbin B. Sotir and J. Craig Fischenich November 2007
Low Moderate High
Complexity
Low Moderate High
Environmental Value Cost
Low Moderate High

OVERVIEW
The live stake (LS) and joint planting (JP)
soil bioengineering systems are units
fabricated from live, woody plant material
branches. Over time, the LSs are effective
for erosion control and the JP system
provides reinforcement to slopes upon
which rock has been placed. The LS and JP
live cut branches are expected to grow roots
and top growth, with the roots providing
additional soil reinforcement and surface
cover providing protection from runoff and
streamflow. The LS and JP units are used
from the baseflow elevation up the face of
the streambank, acting principally to protect
the bank toe and face. In the case of the
JPs, the root soil reinforcement serves to
augment bank protection. The LSs and JPs
are also useful to improve erosion control
and infiltration and support the riparian
zone. Once top growth has developed, both
systems have the potential to accumulate
sediment (Figures 1-7).
Figure 1. Fabricating a live stake or joint
planting unit
Figure 2. Installing a live stake
Figure 3. Installing a joint planting
1 ERDC TN-EMRRP-SR-35

Figure 4. An establishing live stake area
Figure 5. An establishing joint planting
area
Figure 6. Development of a live stake
installation
Figure 7. Illustration of the development
of a joint planting installation
The LS and JP may improve aquatic habitat
by providing food and cover in the riparian
zone and over the water when they are
used in close proximity to the edge of the
stream. Stone used at the base of the LS or
with JP produces substrates suited for an
array of aquatic organisms. Some of these
organisms adapt to living on and within the
rocks and some attach to the leaves and
stems. The leaves and stems may also
become food for shredders.
Species for LS and JP systems can be
selected to provide color, texture, and other
attributes that add a pleasant, natural
landscape appearance. Such plants for LS
and JP systems include willow (Salix spp.),
which tends to be the best from an
adventitious rooting perspective and is
normally an excellent choice. However other
species such as poplar (Populus spp.),
Viburnum spp., Hibiscus spp., shrub
dogwood (Cornus spp.) and buttonbush
(Cephalanthus), also work well. After
establishment, the LS and JP systems can
reduce non-point pollution by intercepting
sediment and attached pollutants that
otherwise enter the stream from overbank
flow areas.
PLANNING
The first step in the planning process is to
determine whether an LS or JP system is an
appropriate alternative to address the
observed and projected mechanisms of
bank loss. Questions that must be
addressed include the following inter-related
items (not exhaustive):
2 ERDC TN-EMRRP-SR-35

1. Is an LS or JP system an appropriate
alternative given the magnitude of the
erosion problem, e.g. its geomorphic
and morphological characteristics?
2. Will the hydrology of the stream
accommodate an LS or JP system that
produces woody growth?
3. Are stream velocities and shear
stresses permissible, and is the risk of
ice and debris damage acceptable?
4. Will sediment accumulation be a
positive or negative result for plant
establishment and survival?
5. Will there be enough sunlight and water
to support the desired system?
6. Are there riparian woody plants in a
reference reach or nearby similar
system that can be used as a template
(and perhaps material source) for the
construction of an LS or JP system?
7. Will site conditions during construction
permit installation?
8. Have risks, and specifically the
consequences of failure, been
considered and what are they (e.g.,
what happens if the LS or JP system
becomes dislodged and materials move
downstream)?
9. What other erosion control devices or
materials will be needed, such as grade
control in the bed, a filter fabric or stone
in the JP or an erosion control fabric
(ECF) on the bank?
10. Is the required construction season
available?
11. Is depredation a potential problem, or
can it be controlled?
12. Are the costs acceptable?
CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Costs for LS and JP projects are
comparable to those for other bank
stabilization techniques. Following are Year
2001 cost ranges for LS and JP projects
based on the authors experiences. These
include profit margins and contingency
factors on contractor bid projects.
The LS costs range from $3 to $10 each,
while the JP costs range from $6 to $15
each. These prices include harvesting,
transportation, handling, fabrication, and
storage of the live cut branch materials.
Costs for other system elements (e.g.
riprap) and bank reshaping are not included.
Costs may vary with access, availability of
live material, time of year and prevailing
labor rates. Fabrication of the LS or JP is
simple and is performed either just prior to
installation in moist climates and a week
prior in dry areas. In dry areas, soaking the
living stakes for a week in water improves
survival. Both LS and JP structures may be
fabricated in custom length for special
needs. Installation is also relatively easy, as
large equipment is not required except to
slope back the bank. Fabrication and
installation costs are usually low.
SITE CONSIDERATIONS
A site suited to LS or JP treatments requires
a hydrologic regime that 1) keeps the invert
of the stake wet during most of the growing
season where the establishment of woody
plants are desirable; 2) allows the roots to
reach the water table or vadose zone during
most of the growing season; and 3) sustains
flows sufficient to keep woody plants
growing well but not large and long-duration
of flows so as to exceed the plants flood
tolerance. Given these requirements,
streams best suited have perennial flows
and are small to moderate in size, although
the authors have successfully applied these
treatments on a wide range of systems.
Some variation in water surface elevation
associated with baseflow is acceptable.
However, the roots must have access to
water.
The second most important factor in site
selection is choosing a site that is not
subject to massive amounts of sediment
movement that could smother plants
establishing on the bank. After they become
3 ERDC TN-EMRRP-SR-35

established, however, LS and JPs are
effective in trapping soils from stream flows.
They also establish conditions for
subsequent colonization or planting, most
often within the captured sediment. When
LS's are used along a stream system,
installation should follow the stabilization of
the upper bank face using an appropriate
erosion control fabric.
A site suited to LS or JP treatments must
have adequate soil (growing medium)
available to allow for root penetration. Lean
clays and highly compacted soils inhibit root
growth and generally result in poor success.
Soil pH should be in the range of 68, and
the soils should have sufficient nutrients or
be augmented with a slow release fertilizer.
Inoculation of the soils with mychorrizae to
stimulate root growth is often helpful.
Other important considerations in site
selections are shade conditions, type of
substrate in which they will be placed, and
their relation to the channel thalweg. Most
plants that are desired for establishment are
shade intolerant and require some sunlight.
As a general rule, moderate sunlight
exposure should exist for LS and JP
structures. There are exceptions where
shade-tolerant plants (e.g. viburnum) can be
used, but success is often poor. Consult the
Natural Resources Conservation Service
offices for information on local plants
suitable for the area of interest.
A cobble substrate or one laden with
interspersed rock can require special
equipment or materials to achieve
penetration. LSs and JPs may be installed
1.5 to 4 ft deep and diameters in the 1- to
2-in. range are typically most successful, so
driving these stakes into a hard substrate
can be problematic. For highly erodible
bank materials, LS should be protected with
a stone toe buttress to prevent scour and
undercutting and an erosion control material
to prevent surficial erosion.
DESIGN
Primary Design Considerations
Depth of erosion must be in the range of 1
to 3 in. for the LS system to be an effective
immediate erosion control method when
used with erosion control fabric. Elevation of
the LS and JP systems must be suited to
the vegetation for which they provide
substrate. In general, the LS or JP must be
at an elevation that permits absorption of
water from groundwater seepage from the
bank to prevent desiccation of the
vegetation. However, it must not be placed
so low as to inundate the vegetation beyond
its flood tolerance. When willow branches or
other woody plants are used in LS or JP
constructions, their basal ends are inserted
well into a moist zone within the bank
(Figures 2 and 3). There is no requirement
for periodic wetting. In these cases, LS's are
intended primarily to provide sediment and
erosion control after the woody vegetation
has become established.
The LS's or JPs are typically installed in a
random pattern or in rows and spaced apart
according to slope and soil conditions
illustrated in Tables 1 and 2. On moist
seeping banks, more LS's may be used to
assist in moisture depletion.
Table 1. Live Stake Spacing
Spacing feet O.C.
Soils
Slope Steepness
Cohesive Non-Cohesive
1:1 2 to 3 N/A
2:1 3 to 4 2 to 3
3:1 or flatter 4 to 6 3 to 5
O.C. = On Center
Assumes stable slope
Note: Recommended to be used with an erosion
control fabric

4 ERDC TN-EMRRP-SR-35

Table 2. Joint Planting Spacing
Spacing Feet O.C.
Soils
Slope Steepness
Cohesive Non-Cohesive
1.5:1 N/A N/A
2:1 1.5 to 3 1.5 to 2
3:1 or flatter 3 to 5 2 to 4
O.C. = On Center
Assumes stable slope
Note: All are recommended to be used with loose
dumped riprap or evenly placed no deeper that 18
with filter fabric or filter stone in non-cohesive soils.

Only limited data have been collected for
shear or velocity tolerances of LS and JP
structures. Available data come largely from
empirical information collected from
constructed projects (Tables 3 and 4).
Designers should exercise caution in
considering limiting velocity or shear stress
criteria. Failure of LS or JP structures can
be attributed to several mechanisms,
notably flanking, and undercutting.
Table 3. Live Stakes in Bare Soil Before
Established
Soils Velocity, ft/sec Shear, lb/ft
Silts .05 .001
Sands .5 .01
Large Gravel 2 .5
Large Cobble 4 2
Firm Loam 2.5 .08
Stiff Clays 3 - 4 .25
12 Rounded
Riprap
6 4

Table 4. Live Stakes with Erosion Control
Fabrics Prior to and After Establishment
Fabric Velocity, ft/sec Shear, lb/ft
Jute
Before Est. 1 2.5 .45
After Est. 3 7 2.1 3.1
Woven Coir
700gm wt.

Before Est. 3 5 2 2.5
After Est. 3 - 10 2.1 3.1

Success for both LSs and JPs requires that
protection be provided against undercutting
and flanking of the treatment. For toe and
flank protection, rock protection should be
designed for velocities and shear stresses
exceeding allowable limits for the soils and
rock underlying and within the LS or JP.
Fischenich (2001) presents these limits.
Angular rock is recommended and should
be sized in accordance with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (1994) specifications
depending on anticipated velocities and
shear stress.
Flank protection can also be aided by
keying the ends of the LS or JP systems
into the banks at both ends and protecting
the flanks with a rock protection. Key ends
well into the bank with rock on the upstream
side, which is also keyed into the bank. For
banks susceptible to significant erosion,
keys or refusals extend farther into the
bank.
Table 5. Threshold Conditions
Class
Name
D
S

(IN)

(DEG)
C

C

(LB/SF)
V
C

(FT/S)
Boulder
Very large >80 42 0.054 37.4 25
Large >40 42 0.054 18.7 19
Medium >20 42 0.054 9.3 14
Small >10 42 0.054 4.7 10
Cobble
Large >5 42 0.054 2.3 7
Small >2.5 41 0.052 1.1 5
Gravel
Very
coarse
>1.25 40 0.050 0.54 3
Coarse >0.63 38 0.047 0.25 2.5

Other Design Considerations
Other design considerations, including the
length of bank and face width being eroded,
will determine the length of the treatment
needed.
Eroded banks are not always conducive to
immediate LS or JP installation and typically
require reshaping or filling treatment to
accommodate the use of LS or JP
installation. If fill is required, rock fill mixed
with other substrate suitable for plant growth
5 ERDC TN-EMRRP-SR-35

will be needed for LS. Rock alone is often
used to prevent undercutting. Fill will need
to be calculated based on cross-sectional
area of the bank times the length of reach.
Size of rock and appropriate gradation
should be determined from U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (1994).
FABRICATION
LSs and JP's are fabricated using fresh,
live cut branch material that roots easily
from cuttings, typically harvested from a
natural stand within 40 miles of the project
site. The materials should be dormant and
free of splits, rot, disease, and insect
infestation. The rootable material that is to
make up the stakes should be selected with
consideration given to the type that exists
on adjacent areas. Native naturally growing
plants such as willow or shrub dogwood
species work well and are usually available.
Material should be harvested from plants
that are at least 2 years old. Harvesting of
live material should leave at least one third
of the parent plant intact. Live cut branches
should be from 0.5 to 1.5 in. in diameter, 1.5
to 3 ft in length for LSs, and 0.75 to 2 in. in
diameter and 2.5 to 3.5 ft in length for JPs.
Cleanly remove all side branches. The
bottom or basal end of the cuttings should
be cleanly cut at an angle and the top end
should be cut square (flat).
The LSs are prepared in bundles of 10 to
25 with the growing tips oriented in the
same direction. Age, size, and species
should be mixed when bundling to reflect
the desired distribution of installed plants.
Harvested material should not be allowed to
dry. If it is necessary to harvest material
significantly before installation, the stakes
should be stored in wet burlap at
approximately 33 to 40 deg F. Alternatively,
one third of the basal end could be stored in
cold water.
CONSTRUCTION
The primary considerations concerning
construction with an LS and JP are bank
preparation, soil types, moisture availability,
and physical handling and installation of live
stakes. Stakes should be soaked for a
minimum of 24 hr in cool, aerated water
prior to installation. Rocks or burlap sacks
can be used to anchor the material in the
stream to prevent it from floating away.
Optimum time for soaking is 5 to 7 days but
they can also be planted the same day as
harvested if they are watered.
Installing LSs or JPs may be as simple as
tamping the live cutting directly into the
ground with a dead blow hammer. If the
ground is hard or rocky, it may require a
punch bar or stake to create a pilot hole.
The hole should be two-thirds to three-
fourths the length of the stake and of
approximately the same diameter. If the
area is dry, it may be advisable to water the
hole prior to installing the stake. Stakes
must be installed with the basal end down.
Stakes that are split during installation
should be removed and replaced. Care
should be taken not to damage the
cambium layer of the stakes.
At least two buds or bud scars should be
present above the ground, so an installed
LS generally has 3 to 6 in. left exposed
above ground. Greater lengths of exposed
stakes increase desiccation and reduce
survival. Good soil-to-stem contact is
required for proper rooting, so it may be
necessary to add soil slurry to pilot holes.
The ground around the LS is typically foot
tamped to ensure good soil contact. JPs
may be installed leaving a few inches above
the riprap rock, but are generally cut flush
with the top of the riprap. When live stakes
are installed into erosion control fabric, the
woven threads must be spread apart or a
small hole cut/punched into the fabric. The
hole should be as small as possible to
preserve the fullest bank protection
available from the erosion control fabric.
Time of Year
LS or JP need to be harvested in the
dormant season for the best results and for
the most cost-effective project. They are
generally best installed during the dormant
season as well, but can be installed any
time of the year if the cuttings are properly
stored (at 3040 deg F, in a low moisture
environment, and with no direct sunlight
6 ERDC TN-EMRRP-SR-35

exposure). Installation into frozen or heavily
frosted soils is difficult, at best, so late fall
and early spring are the preferred
installation times throughout most of the
United States.
OPERATION AND
MAINTENANCE
Operation and maintenance requirements of
any soil bioengineering treatment will vary
depending on the stream system and its
associated parameters, such as velocity,
flood frequency, flood stage, timing, and
future planned use. In any case, be
prepared, at least early in the project life, to
repair or augment the systems until the
vegetation becomes well established.
Minimally, inspection should occur after
each of the first few floods and/or at least
twice a year the first year and once a year
thereafter, preferably after the predominant
flood season.
Immediately repair observed undercutting
and flanking of the treatment and any other
substantial scour evidence. Examine the
live cuttings in the LS or JP for adequate
survival and growth and absence of
disease, insect, or other animal damage
(e.g., grazing, trampling, digging, eating,
and cutting). Successful plants will grow
vigorously and spread their roots into the
surrounding substrate.
If animal or human trampling damage is
evident or the plants are being removed or
eaten by waterfowl or beavers, preventative
measures such as exclosures may be
required. Such exclosures, especially for
woody plants, may only need to be used
until the vegetation is well established (1 to
3 years).
Assuming the LS and/or JP remains in
place and vegetation becomes established
through the development of growth from the
live cutting or through plant development
from natural invasion, maintenance
becomes less over time.
Fish and aquatic invertebrate sampling is
always recommended both before
installation to gather base information and
after the installation has become
established (1 to 3 years), to determine
habitat improvement effectiveness.
APPLICABILITY AND
LIMITATIONS
Techniques described in this technical note
are generally applicable where primary
objectives for streams include habitat
diversity, erosion control, water quality
improvement, and aesthetics, including a
diversity of riparian plants along the
streambank. LS or JP systems are expected
to establish on a wide range of streams
having fairly constant and consistent base
flows as well as ephemeral stream systems.
However, vegetation may tend to dry out
and die in extreme conditions and where
installations are not deep enough to allow
roots to reach adequate moisture. This may
be especially true for JPs. Streams should
not have excessive sediment loads that may
completely cover and smother the
establishing LS or JP. Some caution is also
needed when selecting the species for LS
or JP.
Exercise caution in using JP or LS without a
rock protection or other hard material when
stream velocities at the bank exceed critical
thresholds for underlying soils.
Trampling and grazing of LS can be
detrimental from a living perspective. Use
may be limited in areas where cattle grazing
is not restricted. Note that due to safety, live
stakes are not recommended over the bank
in high traffic areas where people may trip
and fall on them.
Consider the time of year when installing
LSs or JPs as well as water elevation.
Consider consequences of failure if an LS
or JP is flanked and washed downstream
and if the failure is likely to create hazards
that otherwise would not occur (e.g.,
trapping debris and causing undesired local
scour, current deflection, and damming).
7 ERDC TN-EMRRP-SR-35

8 ERDC TN-EMRRP-SR-35
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Research presented in this technical note
was developed under the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Ecosystem Management and
Restoration Research Program. Technical
reviews were provided by Messrs. Jim
Henderson and Jock Conyngham of the
Environmental Laboratory, U.S. Army
Engineer Research and Development
Center.
POINTS OF CONTACT
For additional information, contact the
authors, Robbin B. Sotir (770-424-0719),
sotir@mindspring.com) or Dr. J. Craig
Fischenich, (601-634-3449,
Craig.J.Fischenich@erdc.usace.army.mil),
or the manager of the Ecosystem
Management and Restoration Research
Program, Glenn Rhett (601-634-3717,
Glenn.G.Rhett@erdc.usace.army.mil). This
technical note should be cited as follows:
Sotir, R. B., and J. C. Fischenich.
2007. Live stake and joint planting
for streambank erosion control.
EMRRP Technical Notes Collection.
ERDC TN-EMRRP-SR-35.
Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer
Research and Development Center.
www.wes.army.mil/el/emrrp.
REFERENCES
Fischenich, C. 2001. Stability thresholds for
stream restoration materials. EMRRP
Technical Notes Collection. ERDC TN-
EMRRP-SR-29. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army
Engineer Research and Development
Center. www.wes.army.mil/el/emrrp.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1994.
Hydraulic design of flood control channels.
Engineer Manual 1110-2-1601, Change 1,
30 June 1994. Washington, DC.